🔗 Share this article

Elected officials have issued warnings that the United Kingdom's recent agreements with the US administration are "fundamentally unstable." This comes after revelations that a much-touted deal on drug pricing, which commits to zero tariffs in exchange for the NHS facing higher prices, lacks any underlying contract beyond vague headline terms contained within government press releases.

Lacking Legal Footing

The US-UK pharmaceuticals agreement, promoted as a "significant" achievement, remains an "broad understanding" without detailed provisions. Critics have noted that the official announcements from the UK and US governments describe the deal in sharply different terms. The British version focuses on securing "duty-free access" as a singular success, while the American announcement highlights the commitment for the NHS to pay significantly more for new medications.

"The danger exists that the UK government has promised concessions to increase medicine costs in return for little more than a verbal promise from President Trump," commented David Henig, a trade expert. "It is documented he has a record of not following through on agreements."

A Pattern of Unreliability

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

Furthermore, concessions promised for British farmers as part of an May trade agreement have yet to be formally approved by the US, despite a imminent January deadline. "It is our belief that the US has not finalized the agreed beef export quotas," said Tom Bradshaw of the National Farmers' Union.

Private Ministerial Concerns

Privately, 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 characterized 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, argued: "What is even more astonishing than Trump's temper tantrums is the UK government's credulous faith that his administration is a trustworthy negotiator. The NHS is too precious to be gambled with."

A Mixed Picture of Success and Setback

Ministry sources have downplayed the risk of the US withdrawing from the pharmaceuticals deal. One source indicated the US pharmaceutical industry itself had been advocating for the agreement, desiring stability on imports and pricing, making it more concrete than the paused tech deal.

Officials admit that volatility is inherent in dealing with the Trump administration. However, they argue that the UK has obtained tangible results for businesses, such as preferential tariff rates compared to other nations. "Our achievement of 25% steel tariffs, which is more favorable than the rate for the rest of the world, is a solid gain," one official said.

However, issues have arisen in enacting the initial US-UK accord. Promised access for British beef have not materialized, and the assurance to "remove tariffs on British steel and aluminium" has remains unmet, with tariffs remaining at 25%.

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