Why Global Citizens Should Care
When the UK departs the European Union in 2019, it will attempt to strike new trade deals with countries around the world. But a crucial vote this week means that they might be allowed to conduct talks in secret, without proper parliamentary scrutiny — and this could hurt the world’s poorest. Take action now to keep trade fair.

It’s not just on the news — it is the news.

Brexit, Brexit, Brexit: It became omnipresent once more on Tuesday, as British MPs cast their votes on how the UK will make trade deals after departing the European Union in March 2019.

And beneath all the jargon, something big happened — and it could hurt the world's poorest people.

Take Action: One Year On From Sainsbury’s Decision to Ditch Fairtrade From Some Teas, Ask the CEO for an Update

Everybody is talking about Theresa May’s narrow victory on July 17 to keep Britain out of a customs union with the EU.

It means the UK will likely now have to find a new arrangement to avoid tariffs on any goods we exchange with the EU. It was one controversial amendment of the wider Trade Bill that sparked huge debate, and passed by just six votes in the House of Commons.

But there were many other amendments, too, and one in particular that experts warn might have both local and global consequences. And it goes by a super catchy name: New Clause Three (NC3).

Basically, NC3 would have required all future trade deals to be subject to parliamentary scrutiny.

Green party co-leader Caroline Lucas put the clause forward, and it won wide cross-party support. But it failed in the House of Commons, losing by just 30 votes.

As a result, the government may soon be able sign new trade deals in the dark, without parliament or the public having a say in most circumstances.

Read More: Post-Brexit Trade Deals Could Happen in the Dark. Here's Why That's a Problem

“In the Trade Bill, we had the bizarre situation where MPs voted against an amendment that would have given them proper powers to scrutinise and vote on trade agreements,” said Matt Grady, senior policy advisor at Traidcraft. “Constituents might wonder why those MPs, predominately government MPs, thought it unimportant to scrutinise trade agreements that impact on all areas of public life.”

“We are left with a customs bill that ensures that goods from developing countries can enter the UK cheaply but excludes sustainable development as a pillar of trade policy,” Grady added.

“A trade bill that has no mentioned of sustainable development whatsoever and has almost no scrutiny powers for parliament or the public.”

The bill in its current form also means that parliament cannot act to remedy the potential impact of any trade deal — even if the deal puts human rights in jeopardy, exacerbates poverty, or threatens the environment. In a statement to parliament, Liam Fox, international trade secretary, promised that the government will publish impact assessments for new trade deals, but gave no detail on what issues these would cover, or what bearing they would hold upon negotiations.

It allows the government to overlook any issue without listening to what parliament — and therefore the public — thinks.

Any deals struck could negatively impact the world's poorest countries, and only with transparency can MPs and the public change or stop the process.

Read More: Now That’s What I Call Brexit! 5 Crazy Moments You’ll Never Forget

For example, if Britain chose to import sugar from Australia over an existing deal with Malawi for more favourable terms, it could plunge Malawian farmers into poverty. It’s vital that parliament has the power to intervene and protect the people who could be hit hardest.

Fox passed amendments which means reports must be issued on any trade deals that replace existing ones if there are significant differences — which introduces more scrutiny than was originally proposed. But it also allows the government to avoid this process at their own discretion — and doesn’t give parliament the opportunity to act on the reports.

But it’s not over just yet.

Next, the bill will go to the House of Lords, and activists have vowed to continue to fight for the amendment to be passed into the trade bill.

“Caroline Lucas’ amendment today would have given MPs the ability to scrutinise, change and, if necessary, stop bad trade deals,” said Nick Dearden from Global Justice Now. “Unfortunately on the big question, the government has refused to give real power over trade deals to parliament. This is a defeat for democracy.”

“We certainly haven’t given up hope,” he added. “The Bill now goes to the House of Lords in September and we will continue to fight for parliament’s right to hold the government to account for trade policy.”

Watch this space to find out how you can get involved.

TopicsUKBritainBrexitTheresa MayTradeLiam Fox

Advocacy

Defeat Poverty

Britain Quietly Passes Vital Brexit Amendment That Could Hurt World's Poorest

By James Hitchings-Hales