🔗 Share this article

Ministers and senior MPs have expressed alarm that the United Kingdom's series of deals with the US administration are "fundamentally unstable." This comes after revelations that a recently announced deal on pharmaceutical tariffs, which promises zero tariffs in exchange for the NHS increasing its costs, lacks any underlying contract beyond limited headline terms published in government press releases.

An Agreement in Principle Only

The deal on drug tariffs, hailed as a "generational" achievement, exists as an "agreement in principle" without a signed legal text. Critics have noted that the public statements from the UK and US governments present the deal in divergent terms. The British version emphasizes securing "duty-free access" as a singular success, while the American announcement highlights the commitment for the NHS to pay 25% more for new medications.

"There is a serious risk that the UK government has made commitments to increase medicine costs in return for nothing more than a assurance from President Trump," commented David Henig, a trade policy analyst. "History shows he has form for not keeping promises."

A Pattern of Unreliability

Worries have been amplified by Washington's recent decision to suspend the major technology agreement, which was previously called "a huge leap forward" in the bilateral relationship. The US pointed to a insufficient movement from the UK on addressing wider trade issues 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. "Our understanding is that the US has not finalized the agreed beef export quotas," said Tom Bradshaw of the National Farmers' Union.

Private Ministerial Concerns

In confidential discussions, ministers have expressed concerns that the government's agreements with the US are flimsy and unreliable. One minister was quoted as stating the series of agreements as "built on sand," while another characterized the situation as the "new normal" in the transatlantic relationship, marked by "additional layers of volatility and unpredictability."

Layla Moran, chair of the health select committee, argued: "What is even more astonishing than the US approach is the UK government's optimistic assumption that his administration is a reliable partner. The NHS is not a bargaining chip."

A Mixed Picture of Success and Setback

Government figures have attempted to minimize the chances of the US withdrawing from the pharmaceuticals deal. One source suggested 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 inherent in dealing with the Trump administration. However, they contend that the UK has obtained tangible results for businesses, such as lower steel tariffs 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, problems have surfaced in carrying out the May tariff agreement. Promised quotas on beef exports have not materialized, and the commitment to "remove tariffs on British steel and aluminium" has not been fulfilled, with tariffs remaining at 25%.

Moving forward, the two sides have agreed to resume talks on the suspended digital agreement in January, following what were described as "constructive" meetings between UK and US officials in Washington.