🔗 Share this article

Government ministers and leading parliamentarians have raised concerns that the United Kingdom's recent agreements with Washington are "built on sand." This comes after revelations that a recently announced deal on pharmaceutical tariffs, which commits to zero tariffs in exchange for the NHS facing higher prices, lacks any detailed agreement beyond broad headline terms published in government press releases.

A Deal Without Detail

The deal on drug tariffs, hailed as a "significant" achievement, remains an "broad understanding" without detailed provisions. Observers point out that the press releases from the UK and US governments present the deal in markedly contrasting terms. The British version celebrates 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 only a pledge from President Trump," said David Henig, a trade policy analyst. "History shows he has a record of not honouring his word."

Broader Instability and a Paused Tech Deal

Worries have been intensified by Washington's recent decision to put on ice the high-value digital accord, which was previously described as "a generational step-change" in the bilateral relationship. The US cited a lack of progress from the UK on reducing other tariffs as the reason for the pause.

In a separate development, concessions promised for British farmers as part of an earlier tariff deal have still not been formally ratified by the US, despite a imminent January deadline. "Our understanding is that the US has failed to approve the agreed beef export quotas," said Tom Bradshaw of the National Farmers' Union.

Anxiety Behind Closed Doors

In confidential discussions, ministers have voiced worries that the government's US-UK accords are unstable and unpredictable. One minister was quoted as stating the series of agreements as "built on sand," while another characterized the situation as the "prevailing condition" in the transatlantic relationship, marked by "additional layers of volatility and unpredictability."

Layla Moran, chair of the health select committee, argued: "Perhaps most shocking than Trump's temper tantrums is the UK government's optimistic assumption that his administration is a trustworthy negotiator. The NHS is too precious to be gambled with."

Government Downplays Risks, Points to Gains

Officials have attempted to minimize the chances of the US backing out of the pharmaceuticals deal. One source noted the US pharmaceutical industry itself had been pushing for the agreement, wanting clarity on imports and pricing, making it of tangible value than the paused tech deal.

Officials acknowledge that volatility is part and parcel of dealing with the Trump administration. However, they argue that the UK has achieved real benefits for businesses, such as reduced duties on automobiles compared to other nations. "Securing 25% steel tariffs, which is more favorable than the rate for the rest of the world, is a solid gain," one official said.

Nevertheless, delays have surfaced in implementing the broader trade deal. Promised reciprocal agricultural allowances have failed to be approved, and the assurance to "reduce steel tariffs to zero" has is still pending, with tariffs staying at 25%.

As negotiations continue, the two sides have agreed to resume talks on the paused tech prosperity deal in January, following what were described as "constructive" meetings between UK and US officials in Washington.