🔗 Share this article

Elected officials have expressed alarm that the United Kingdom's negotiated accords with Donald Trump are "built on sand." This comes after revelations that a so-called "milestone" deal on pharmaceutical tariffs, which promises zero tariffs in exchange for the NHS paying more, lacks any underlying contract beyond vague headline terms contained within government press releases.

A Deal Without Detail

The US-UK pharmaceuticals agreement, described as a "generational" achievement, exists as an "agreement in principle" without formal ratification. It has been highlighted that the press releases from the UK and US governments describe the deal in divergent terms. The British version emphasizes securing "zero per cent tariffs" as a singular success, while the American announcement highlights the agreement for the NHS to pay significantly more for new medications.

"The danger exists that the UK government has made commitments to increase medicine costs in return for nothing more than a verbal promise from President Trump," commented David Henig, a trade expert. "We know he has a tendency for not following through on agreements."

Wider Concerns Amidst a Suspended Agreement

Anxieties have been amplified by Washington's move to suspend the £31bn "tech prosperity deal", which was previously heralded as "a transformative pact" in the bilateral relationship. The US claimed a insufficient movement from the UK on reducing other tariffs as the reason for the pause.

Additionally, concessions agreed to for British farmers as part of an initial accord have yet to be formally signed off by the US, despite a fast-approaching January deadline. "We have been informed that that the US has not finalized the reciprocal tariff rate quota," said Tom Bradshaw of the National Farmers' Union.

Private Ministerial Concerns

Privately, ministers have admitted unease that the government's US-UK accords are unstable and unpredictable. One minister reportedly said the series of agreements as "resting on shaky ground," while another described the situation as the "new normal" in the transatlantic relationship, marked by "increased uncertainty and instability."

Layla Moran, chair of the health select committee, remarked: "What is even more astonishing than the administration's tactics is the UK government's optimistic assumption that his administration is a good faith actor. The NHS is too precious to be gambled with."

A Mixed Picture of Success and Setback

Government figures have sought to reduce the chances of the US withdrawing from the pharmaceuticals deal. One source noted the US pharmaceutical industry itself had been lobbying for the agreement, desiring stability on imports and pricing, making it more concrete than the paused tech deal.

Officials admit that instability is inherent in dealing with the current US leadership. However, they contend that the UK has obtained tangible results for businesses, such as lower steel tariffs compared to other nations. "The fact we have 25% steel tariffs, which is more favorable than the rate for the rest of the world, is not flimsy," one official said.

Nevertheless, delays have surfaced in implementing the May tariff agreement. Promised quotas on beef exports have not materialized, and the assurance to "reduce steel tariffs to zero" has remains unmet, with tariffs remaining at 25%.

Looking ahead, the two sides have planned to recommence talks on the suspended digital agreement in January, following what were described as "very positive" meetings between UK and US officials in Washington.