Starmer's US trade deal ‘will flood market with substandard beef'

Britain's trade deal with the US will flood the market with substandard beef, farming campaigners have warned.
The UK and US will cut taxes on beef imports and exports as part of the agreement announced on Thursday.
Steve Reed, the Environment Secretary, has insisted there will be no watering down of food standards, with imports of hormone-treated beef or chlorinated chicken remaining illegal.
But Liz Webster, the founder of the group Save British Farming, claimed low-quality beef could still enter the UK because the country's borders are not strong enough to keep it out.
'It's all very well from packaging up the details and saying, 'Oh, it's fine we will only give you the good stuff.' There is no mechanism to ensure that that happens,' she said.
'We've already got a lot of substandard food coming in here, because our borders are as good as a chocolate teapot, and there is no mechanism in America to filter out produce.'
Tom Bradshaw, the president of the National Farmers Union, stressed the importance of strong standards on American food imports.
'In any trade deal with the US, ministers must uphold their commitments and ensure that food that would be illegal to produce here from a food safety, animal welfare or environmental perspective is not granted access to our market,' he said on Wednesday, before the deal was announced.
After its announcement, he praised the Government for maintaining high food standards and securing access to the US market for British beef farmers.
He said: 'We appreciate the Government's efforts in listening to our concerns, particularly around maintaining high standards, protecting sensitive agricultural sectors and securing reciprocal access for beef.
'For several years, we've campaigned with the UK's agricultural attachés in Washington for market access for British beef, a product globally respected for its quality and strong environmental credentials.
'These efforts have contributed to enabling the UK government to secure ring-fenced access for British beef exports to the US.'
The deal on agriculture gives British farmers a tariff-free quota for 13,000 metric tonnes of beef exports – equivalent to 52 million steaks.
US tariffs on British beef typically vary between 4 per cent and 26 per cent depending on the type and quality of cut, according to the World Trade Organisation. Britain's tariffs on American beef stand at up to 20 per cent.
The UK's beef farming industry was worth an estimated £3.9 billion in 2024, while the US beef industry was valued at £81.52 billion.
One beef farmer called on the Government to be stringent on food imports from America.
Ian McCubbine a Surrey-based farmer, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: 'I think that we have to be careful that we are stringent about food standards.
'Our beef, in fact, our whole food chain is globally reckoned to be the best quality of everything. And I'm slightly concerned that the US want to put stuff into us which is going to be lower quality.'
He added: 'I know I hear all the stuff that's going to be stringently looked at and stuff like that, but sometimes the devil is in the details.'
He said the Government had to be 'strong' about standards, adding: 'We've spent probably the last 50 years building an industry that is strong on environmental gain, is strong on animal welfare.
'We stopped our grocery gross hormones, probably 35-40 years ago.'
He added the main problem was not knowing what was being given to livestock in America.
'A Texas feedlot that's 19-miles long, how do we know what they're putting in? We just don't know. We just don't know that.'
But writing for The Telegraph, Mr Reed said: 'I have always been clear: no hormone-treated beef, no chlorinated chicken.
'As promised, these products remain illegal in the UK. That will not change,' he said. 'But that isn't all. For the first time ever, this Labour Government has secured exclusive access for UK beef farmers to the US market.
'That means there is a major opportunity to increase exports to the world's largest consumer market where our high-quality beef products are in demand.
'Only very few other countries enjoy this level of access.'
On Friday, Labour's chief secretary to the Treasury insisted that the US-UK trade deal will not open the door to hormone-treated beef imports into Britain.
Darren Jones said the Government's rules on food standards 'have not changed and they will not change'.
He told the Today programme: 'Our food standards have been protected. They have not changed and they will not change.
'What that means of course is that companies, whether in the United States or in other parts of the world, know that because of those food production standards if they try to import hormone-treated meat, for example, that that is in breach of the law, there are checks on these products at the border and if people are in breach of the law there will be consequences for that.'
No hormone-treated beef or chlorinated chicken on British soil
By Steve Reed, the Environment Secretary
This Government will always act in the national interest to protect British businesses and jobs across the economy.
Thousands of jobs have been saved by the groundbreaking deal with the US.
As the Prime Minister said, it is fitting that we took this step to deepen our ties with America 80 years after VE Day.
It's the second major trade announcement in a week – after the India Free Trade Agreement on Tuesday – this historic agreement with the US has cut tariffs for some of the UK's most vital industries.
UK carmakers and steelworkers will all feel the benefit, as lower tariffs translate into lower costs.
The deal we signed on Thursday will also protect British farmers and uphold our high animal welfare and environmental standards.
This Labour Government will always act in the national interest to protect Britain's farmers and secure our food security.
The Tories sold our farmers down the river with their dodgy trade deals.
As the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, I have always been clear: no hormone-treated beef, no chlorinated chicken.
As promised, these products remain illegal in the UK. That will not change.
Compare this approach to Nigel Farage who has threatened to betray our farmers, allowing chicken washed in chlorine and reared in the most appalling conditions to flood the UK market, which could put British producers out of business.
But that isn't all. For the first time ever, this Government has secured exclusive access for UK beef farmers to the US market.
That means there is a major opportunity to increase exports to the world's largest consumer market where our high-quality beef products are in demand.
Only very few other countries enjoy this level of access.
All this comes alongside the India trade deal, which is a major boost for our world-class food and drink industry with lamb, salmon, whisky and gin benefiting from lower tariffs.
These deals are another step on the road to a more profitable farming sector. And our support for our farmers and growers is steadfast, with £5 billion being invested into sustainable food production, and a New Deal for farmers backing British produce in the public sector too.
This Government has a Plan for Change that will growth the economy, and our trade deals show are we are delivering for Britain.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Daily Mail​

27 minutes ago

• Daily Mail​

Mahmoud Khalil sparks outrage days after being released from ICE detention amid calls for him to be deported

Pro-Palestine activist Mahmoud Khalil has sparked fury by returning to the frontlines of a protest just two days after he was released from Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention. The Columbia University student, who was swept up in an ICE arrest on March 8 and threatened with deportation, vowed not to be silenced by the Trump administration, even as they continue to seek a legal avenue to expel him from the United States. Khalil arrived back in New York on Saturday, hours after a federal judge ruled his detention was unconstitutional and demanded he be freed to return home to his wife and newborn baby, who was born while he was incarcerated. The 30-year-old Palestinian, who was born in a Syrian refugee camp, wore a shirt which read 'Lift the siege on Gaza ' as he celebrated his temporary victory. He clutched his wife Noor Abdalla's hand and threw his arms up in victory as the crowd cheered, thanking his supporters, legal team and protestors who had the 'courage' to continue to protest in the face of ICE deportations. Khalil told the crowd Columbia 'would do anything and everything it can to ensure that the words ''free Palestine'' are not uttered anywhere near it. But while we are here, Free, Free Palestine.' He said that while the administration had tried to paint him as 'violent', he argued he is simply 'a Palestinian who refused to stay silent while watching a genocide.' He went on to say 'genocide... is being funded by the US government.' His comments have sparked mass backlash from pro-MAGA loyalists on social media, who questioned why he opted to return to a protest and throw his freedom back in the administration's face. Others questioned why he wasn't spending time with his newborn child, given he missed the birth while he was detained. 'He's not a citizen. Why is he being allowed to continue terrorizing American students?' one critic asked. 'Mahmoud Khalil 's green card should be revoked permanently. He doesn't belong in the US when his whole purpose is to stir up discontent and rage. No other country would put up with this behavior from a foreigner with a green card,' another wrote. 'Apparently spending quality time with his 3 mo old baby wasn't high on his priority list—inciting violence against Jewish people came first,' a third added. Speaking to the New York Times after his release, Khalil warned President Trump that the actions of his ICE agents had done little to deter him. 'I don't think what happened to me would stop me [from protesting],' he said. 'If anything, it's actually reinforced my belief that what we're doing is right.' Khalil compared his arrest to the actions of government agents in Syria who acted outside of the scope of the law, noting: 'That's literally what made me flee.' After arriving back in New York, Khalil had said: 'If they threaten me with detention, even if they would kill me, I would still speak up for Palestine. 'I just want to go back and continue the work I was already doing, advocating for Palestinian rights, a speech that should actually be celebrated rather than punished.' But Khalil made a name for himself when he arrived on Columbia's campus in 2023 as he tried to organize guest speakers to discuss the so called apartheid in Israel on campus and led the pro-Palestinian movement. By 2024, he was acting as a negotiator between the University and protestors who had set up an encampment on campus in solidarity with Palestinians suffering in Gaza. Despite securing a green card in November 2024, Khalil was arrested by plain clothes ICE agents on March 8 while returning home with his wife from dinner with friends. Agents initially said his student visa had been canceled, but when it was noted that Khalil did not need a student visa, Secretary of State Marco Rubio revealed he had been identified as a foreign policy threat. Khalil was transferred to a detention facility in Louisiana, and spent a total of 104 days incarcerated while a team of high powered lawyers worked tirelessly to secure his freedom. Now, authorities are challenging his release and seeking ways to secure his deportation. Assistant Homeland Security secretary Tricia McLaughlin said: 'This is yet another example of how out of control members of the judicial branch are undermining national security. 'Their conduct not only denies the result of the 2024 election, it also does great harm to our constitutional system by undermining public confidence in the courts.'

Reuters

29 minutes ago

• Reuters

Wolfspeed reaches agreement with creditors, plans bankruptcy filing

June 22 (Reuters) - Wolfspeed (WOLF.N), opens new tab said on Sunday that it has reached a restructuring agreement with creditors and plans to file for bankruptcy in the U.S. in the near future. The restructuring agreement would provide the struggling chipmaker with $275 million in fresh financing by some of its existing creditors, the company said in its statement.

Times

30 minutes ago

• Times

Times letters: Britain and the tinderbox in the Middle East

Write to letters@ Sir, Sir Keir Starmer has called on Iran to 'return to the negotiating table' after the US bombed its nuclear sites. But treating Iran as a legitimate negotiating partner while it refuses to recognise Israel's right to exist only reinforces Tehran's rejectionist stance. History provides a clear road map: recognition leads to peace. Of the 164 countries that now recognise Israel, none are engaged in active warfare with it. Egypt's recognition in 1979 ended decades of conflict. Jordan's recognition in 1994 transformed enemies into sometime partners. The Abraham Accords demonstrated that recognition can unlock prosperity and co-operation even without resolving every regional grievance. Regional issues need and deserve resolution but they cannot be resolved in an environment where a significant power actively works towards the destruction of Israel. Negotiations remain preferable to conflict, but Israel needs to be involved in these talks as a recognised sovereign state. Without recognition and meaningful bilateral negotiations between Israel and Iran, the present situation will continue as a zero-sum game, which Israel simply cannot afford to lose. Tony Morcowitz Brighton and Hove Sir, When Sir Keir Starmer announced the Chagos Islands giveaway, he said that surrendering sovereignty was necessary because the UK had to be seen to uphold international law. Now he has gone on to publish statements in support of the US bombing of Iran. He is publicly supporting a flagrant breach of international law forbidding unprovoked attacks on other nations and, indeed, is speaking in defiance of advice from his attorney-general warning that any attack on Iran could be illegal. The government asserted that the international-law principles embodied by the Chagos deal would earn Britain respect in the 'global south', but in light of the UK's support for Israeli-American actions against Iran, all that the rest of the world will now observe is that Britain's commitment to international law is equivocal and inconsistent. Robert Frazer Salford Sir, International events emphasise the paucity of the UK's air defences, in particular the capability to counter attacks by ballistic missiles. Should the situation deteriorate to the extent that we are threatened, this will be critical, with Britain's best anti-missile defence platforms being six Type 45 destroyers, one of which is deployed with HMS Queen Elizabeth. Other Type 45s may or may not be available, with a number in refit, but ship-based systems are insufficient to defend the entire nation. Recent announcements on defence, from the strategic defence review through to promises to raise spending by a few percentage points in future, will do nothing to repair our non-existent integrated air defence. The government needs to act now and procure anti-ballistic systems. Group Captain Michael Norris St Austell, Cornwall Sir, In the raid on RAF Brize Norton (news, Jun 21), one of the engines on the Voyager aircraft was so badly damaged by the red paint sprayed on it by Palestine Action activists that it is said that the tanker is out of action and a new engine will cost £25 million. Surely this is nonsense: our planes are so vulnerable than an enemy would only have to drop paint over them to make them useless in war time? Brian RJ Simpson Gosport, Hants Sir, My father, Michael Beetham, was station commander of RAF Khormaksar in Aden, Yemen, in the mid-1960s, during a period of heightened tensions. As a small boy, I watched as he set off in the evenings to drive around the perimeter fence in his Land Rover. Sometimes he took me with him. He would stop and talk to personnel and inspect fences. He went on to be the longest-serving Chief of the Air Staff since Lord Trenchard, founder of the RAF. I wonder who carries out such checks these days at bases like Brize Norton? Alex Beetham Woodditton, Cambs Sir, There are many reasons why the House of Lords may not survive in its present form. Hubris is certainly one. For unnamed peers to tell The Times that they will use 'black arts' to 'kill off' the assisted dying bill and employ 'every means possible' to prevent it becoming law is hubris of the highest order (news, Jun 21). The Lords can and should seek to improve the bill through its scrutiny. That is indeed its role. But to seek fundamentally to thwart the will of the elected Commons is not. It is not just the future of the bill that will be at stake in this regard. So too will the future of an unelected second chamber. Sir Leigh Lewis Watford Sir, In just three days the concept of laws being based on Judeo-Christian principles has been removed by the House of Commons. Aborting a full-term unborn child will no longer be a criminal offence and assisting someone to kill themselves was approved. MPs have replaced a morality based on respect for life by a culture of death. Neither these changes were in the Labour Party manifesto and the House of Lords should therefore not feel constrained in refusing to endorse them. Nicholas Bennett Minister of health for Wales, 1990-92; Bromley, Kent Sir, I am horrified by the moral ambiguity demonstrated by the government. After endless debate, the third reading of the assisted dying bill has narrowly been passed, a compassionate piece of legislation that will give terminally ill people more control over their lives. By contrast, after only two hours' debate the government has amended abortion regulations to allow women to have a termination at any stage of their pregnancy, without fear of prosecution. The 24-week limit for legal abortion was set to protect viable foetuses. This amendment sanctions the murder of babies capable of leading independent lives. I hope there is sufficient wisdom among the members of the House of Lords to persuade the Commons to rethink the unethical decision they have made. Frances MacDonald Stratford-upon-Avon Sir, The reports that HS2 may now cost £100 billion came in the same week that Nice concluded the known benefits of the new Alzheimer's drugs lecanemab and donanemab do not justify the expense of funding them through the public healthcare system (news, Jun 19; letter, Jun 21). Given that the government is likely to have to make stark choices in its next budget, the choice of either cutting 30 minutes off journey times between London to Birmingham or extending the meaningful lives of thousands of people each year could not be starker. If Rachel Reeves's repeated statements that her decisions reflect the choice of the people are true, then let's ask them directly which they'd rather have. Dr Barry Johnson Sheffield Sir, Settle to Carlisle is now seen as one of the world's greatest railway journeys. However, the line started out in difficulty and there are some interesting comparisons to be made with HS2. The estimate to build the line was £2 million, but the challenges of building a route through the Pennines resulted in the cost and time to completion doubling. The line opened to freight traffic 150 years ago (passengers a year later). The final cost was about £500 million in today's money, and it took five years to build. Admittedly it is only 72 miles long (compared with 120 miles for HS2) and the hundreds of boys employed were paid half a crown (12.5p) per day. The railway today is a magnificent reminder of the vision of the Midland Railway Company, which sponsored it, and the tenacity and ingenuity of those who overcame the challenges of a hostile environment to build it. I wonder if in 150 years HS2 will be as popular — assuming of course that it is completed. Dr Bryan Gray Hunsonby, Cumbria Sir, It is nothing short of insanity that elite rugby union players are about to embark on a tour to Australia with the British & Irish Lions after another very lengthy domestic season, when there is clear evidence showing a dose-response relationship between head impacts and neurodegenerative disease. The longer and more intensely one plays contact or collision sports, the higher the risk of brain damage. The Lions tour — a gruelling and commercially driven tournament — is being promoted as a pinnacle of achievement. Where is the duty of care to players? Where are the safeguards and transparent risk disclosures? Rugby cannot continue to ignore the realities of repeated brain trauma in pursuit of nostalgia and profit. It must start putting welfare above spectacle. Alix Popham Ret'd professional rugby union player; Welsh international, 33 caps; Newport Sir, You report that the late Queen did indeed carry cash, for betting on the races (news, Jun 21). As a young journalist at The Sun in the Eighties I was sent to report on the Derby. The press box was next to the royal box and we all saw Her Majesty dash down to the front to watch a winner triumph. I was designated to ask her: 'Ma'am, did you have a bet on the winning horse?' I leaned over from the box to be faced by the back of Prince Philip, who was chatting to the Queen. My first attempt was ignored and feeling embarrassed and slightly annoyed I tried again. Philip drifted off and so I repeated the question. 'Did I what?' she replied frostily. Red-faced and sweating I stumbled through it again, when she graced me with a beautiful smile and said: 'Oh no, my dear, I never bet!' The next year a barrier was erected between the two boxes so that she would not be approached again. Muriel Freeman (née Burden) South Shields Sir, Car horns don't need to be loud to be effective (letters, Jun 17-21). When I was living in Bath in the early 1970s I drove an MGB, which I had bought from a friend. He had fitted a trio of strident air horns, but I discovered that if I pressed the button very gently the horns would emit a gasping or panting sound. Being very immature at the time I occasionally made this happen while waiting as a pretty girl crossed the road. This sometimes produced an amused response, but not always. One of the recipients of this attention, a particularly pretty girl, subsequently recognised me when we met at a party and she ticked me off for my uncouth behaviour, which I never repeated. In October we will have been married for 50 years. Richard Le Masurier Milford-on-Sea, Hants Sir, My husband was lucky enough to get ten birthday cards from me last year (letters, 18, 19 & 21). After forgetting to buy one for him I simply added 'and Wendy' to the cards he had received from other people. Wendy Rayner Huddersfield Sir, Dominic Sandbrook's article on class and how to define a gentleman (comment, Jun 21) reminded me of an events notice I saw when stationed in the British Army of the Rhine with the King's Own Scottish Borderers in the mid-60s. Those invited to a Minden Day dance were: 'Officers and their Ladies, NCOs and their Wives, and Other Ranks and their Women-Folk.' Bill Wells Wisbech, Cambs Sir, I've always felt rather proud of the fact that the Yiddish word 'mensch' means much the same as 'gentleman' but without any class implications — or gender implications either; a woman can be a mensch too. Or not, as the case may be. Margaret Lesser Bowdon, Greater Manchester Sir, Mark Twain, as is so often the case, hit the nail on the head. A gentleman, he said, is someone who knows how to play the banjo and doesn't. Dr David Bogod Nottingham Write to letters@