🔗 Share this article

Government ministers and leading parliamentarians have raised concerns that the United Kingdom's negotiated accords with the US administration are "built on sand." This follows revelations that a recently announced deal on medicines, which pledges zero tariffs in exchange for the NHS increasing its costs, lacks any formal legal text beyond limited headline terms contained within government press releases.

An Agreement in Principle Only

The arrangement concerning medicines, described as a "generational" achievement, remains an "statement of intent" without detailed provisions. Observers point out that the public statements from the UK and US governments describe the deal in divergent terms. The British version focuses on securing "zero per cent tariffs" as a unique achievement, while the American announcement concentrates on the expectation for the NHS to pay significantly more for new medications.

"The danger exists that the UK government has made commitments to raise drug prices in return for nothing more than a verbal promise from President Trump," commented David Henig, a trade policy analyst. "We know he has a tendency for not honouring his word."

Broader Instability and a Paused Tech Deal

Anxieties have been amplified by Washington's move to pause the high-value digital accord, which was previously called "a generational step-change" in the bilateral relationship. The US cited a failure to advance from the UK on addressing wider trade issues as the reason for the pause.

In a separate development, concessions secured for British farmers as part of an May trade agreement have yet to be formally signed off by the US, despite a fast-approaching January deadline. "Our understanding is that the US has failed to approve the reciprocal tariff rate quota," said Tom Bradshaw of the National Farmers' Union.

Uncertainty Among Officials

In confidential discussions, ministers have voiced worries that the government's US-UK accords are flimsy and unreliable. One minister reportedly said the series of agreements as "resting on shaky ground," while another described the situation as the "current reality" 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 Trump's temper tantrums is the UK government's credulous faith that his administration is a good faith actor. The NHS is of vital importance."

Government Downplays Risks, Points to Gains

Government figures have downplayed the possibility of the US withdrawing from the pharmaceuticals deal. One source indicated the US pharmaceutical industry itself had been lobbying for the agreement, seeking certainty on imports and pricing, making it less abstract than the paused tech deal.

Officials concede that volatility is inherent in dealing with the Trump administration. However, they contend that the UK has secured concrete outcomes for businesses, such as preferential tariff rates 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 a solid gain," one official said.

Yet, problems have arisen in carrying out the initial US-UK accord. Promised access for British beef have not materialized, and the assurance to "eliminate duties on UK metals" has remains unmet, with tariffs remaining at 25%.

As negotiations continue, the two sides have planned to recommence talks on the suspended digital agreement in January, following what were described as "constructive" meetings between UK and US officials in Washington.