🔗 Share this article

Elected officials have issued warnings that the United Kingdom's recent agreements with Washington are "lacking a solid foundation." This stems from revelations that a so-called "milestone" deal on medicines, which commits to zero tariffs in exchange for the NHS facing higher prices, lacks any detailed agreement beyond limited headline terms contained within government press releases.

Lacking Legal Footing

The arrangement concerning medicines, promoted as a "landmark" achievement, is still an "agreement in principle" without detailed provisions. Critics have noted that the press releases from the UK and US governments frame the deal in markedly contrasting terms. The British version emphasizes securing "duty-free access" as a unique achievement, while the American announcement highlights the agreement for the NHS to pay 25% more for new medications.

"The danger exists that the UK government has agreed to terms to raise drug prices in return for nothing more than a assurance from President Trump," said David Henig, a trade expert. "History shows he has a tendency for not following through on agreements."

Broader Instability and a Paused Tech Deal

Concerns have been heightened by Washington's recent decision to pause the £31bn "tech prosperity deal", which was previously heralded as "a transformative pact" in the bilateral relationship. The US cited 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 May trade agreement have not been formally ratified by the US, despite a looming January deadline. "We have been informed that that the US has not yet signed off the agreed beef export quotas," 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 described the series of agreements as "built on sand," while another characterized the situation as the "prevailing condition" 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 US approach is the UK government's optimistic assumption that his administration is a good faith actor. The NHS is of vital importance."

A Mixed Picture of Success and Setback

Ministry sources have downplayed the chances of the US reneging on the pharmaceuticals deal. One source indicated the US pharmaceutical industry itself had been lobbying for the agreement, wanting clarity on imports and pricing, making it of tangible value than the paused tech deal.

Officials concede that instability is a feature of dealing with the current US leadership. However, they maintain that the UK has achieved real benefits for businesses, such as preferential tariff rates compared to other nations. "Our achievement of 25% steel tariffs, which is better than the rate for the rest of the world, is not flimsy," one official said.

However, delays have emerged in carrying out the broader trade deal. Promised reciprocal agricultural allowances have failed to be approved, and the commitment to "reduce steel tariffs to zero" has is still pending, with tariffs remaining at 25%.

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