🔗 Share this article

Government ministers and leading parliamentarians have issued warnings that the United Kingdom's negotiated accords with Donald Trump are "lacking a solid foundation." This stems from revelations that a much-touted deal on drug pricing, which commits to zero tariffs in exchange for the NHS facing higher prices, lacks any detailed agreement beyond vague headline terms outlined by government press releases.

A Deal Without Detail

The US-UK pharmaceuticals agreement, described as a "significant" achievement, is still an "agreement in principle" without a signed legal text. It has been highlighted that the official announcements from the UK and US governments present the deal in sharply different terms. The British version emphasizes securing "zero per cent tariffs" as a singular success, while the American announcement concentrates on the commitment for the NHS to pay 25% more for new medications.

"We face a genuine possibility that the UK government has agreed to terms to raise drug prices in return for nothing more than a assurance from President Trump," commented David Henig, a trade policy analyst. "We know he has a record of not keeping promises."

Broader Instability and a Paused Tech Deal

Concerns have been amplified by Washington's move to suspend the major technology agreement, which was previously heralded as "a generational step-change" in the bilateral relationship. The US pointed to a lack of progress from the UK on lowering trade barriers as the reason for the pause.

In a separate development, concessions secured for British farmers as part of an initial accord have not been formally approved 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.

Uncertainty Among Officials

Behind the scenes, ministers have expressed concerns that the government's agreements with the US are unstable and unpredictable. One minister described the series of agreements as "built on sand," while another described the situation as the "current reality" in the transatlantic relationship, marked by "additional layers of volatility and unpredictability."

Layla Moran, chair of the health select committee, stated: "What is even more astonishing than the administration's tactics is the UK government's optimistic assumption that his administration is a good faith actor. The NHS is not a bargaining chip."

Official Reassurances and Concrete Outcomes

Ministry sources have attempted to minimize the possibility of the US reneging on the pharmaceuticals deal. One source suggested the US pharmaceutical industry itself had been lobbying for the agreement, seeking certainty on imports and pricing, making it more concrete than the paused tech deal.

Officials concede that unpredictability is part and parcel of dealing with the Trump administration. However, they maintain that the UK has obtained tangible results for businesses, such as lower steel tariffs compared to other nations. "The fact we have 25% steel tariffs, which is better than the rate for the rest of the world, is a solid gain," one official said.

However, issues have arisen in carrying out the broader trade deal. Promised access for British beef have not materialized, and the pledge to "reduce steel tariffs to zero" has remains unmet, with tariffs staying at 25%.

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