Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee inquiry into food and agriculture in UK trade policy

The Government’s trade policy lacks coherence at present. In line with previous recommendations from the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee, we recommend that the Government comes forward with a comprehensive, cross-departmental trade strategy. Further, we recommend that a strategy should algins with the Government’s commitments to sustainable development, international environmental and climate commitments, and its commitments under internationally recognised human rights.

Democratic oversight and scrutiny of UK trade negotiations and wider trade policy is poor. We recommend that parliament, devolved governments and civil society have appropriate oversight of trade negotiating objectives and that parliament and devolved governments are empowered to scrutinise trade negotiations as they progress. The Government should also publish thorough impact assessments throughout the negotiations, especially on economic, social and environmental impacts.

Current and future Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) have some concerning implications for the agri-food sector, particularly for small farmers in the global South. In particular:

1. There is a risk that the FTAs with Australia and New Zealand, and the newly signed Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (CPTPP) will increase global greenhouse gas emissions. While all of these FTAs contain environment chapters, none of them are binding. Climate change is an existential threat to the agri-food sector, and is particularly impacting small farmers in the global South. Pending FTAs with the Gulf Cooperation Council and India could have similarly negative impacts on the climate.

2. There is also a risk that human rights are undermined as a result of the trade in agricultural goods under current and future FTAs for example, FTAs with New Zealand, Australia, and CPTPP

3. The CPTPP agreement:

   1. Places requirements on signatories to introduce prohibitive seed patent laws, which could undermine the ability of small farmers to save and trade seeds.

   2. Includes an investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) provision, meaning that the UK and other signatories may be open to legal challenge if they introduce measures that would improve human rights or environmental protections, if those are deemed to result in financial losses for a business in agri-food value chains.

4. These trade agreements have no binding provisions on human rights including labour rights. In addition, the UK has no explicit law currently in place which is able to hold UK businesses to account for their role in causing cross-border human rights violations, some of which are recognisable as criminal in nature. This means that in practice trade with other countries can be undertaken with impunity for physical crimes, particularly when trading with a country that has a track record of weak enforcement of its laws.

The Government should introduce a new Business, Human Rights and Environment Act, to protect people and planet from abuse. A new law must include accountability mechanisms, including enforcement and the provision of access to justice for overseas victims. This will create parity between businesses competing with each other in UK consumer, business and financial markets with regards to human rights obligations, and would avoid inconsistencies between different UK trade agreements which may have varying provisions on human rights.