International trade deals normally involve reducing “non-tariff barriers” which make trading between two partners more difficult. One example of this is setting the same regulatory standards on certain goods so that they don’t have to be checked when they move from one country to another.
In terms of food regulation, the UK (which follows EU rules) currently has “vastly different” and significantly more stringent sanitary and animal welfare standards than the USA. This means we can’t currently import certain foods from the USA as they don’t meet our standards (“chlorinated chicken” is a commonly referenced case in point).
A parliamentary report picked out some key differences as including: “the US uses chemical washes, such as chlorine, in its production process… the US uses growth hormones in animal feed… GM foods are sold without labelling in the US… and… pesticides banned in the EU can be used in the US.”
The government ministers responsible for international trade and environment, food and rural affairs both currently deny that there will be a reduction in food regulation standards after Brexit. Ultimately this would depend on what kind of trade deals the UK tried to negotiate after Brexit.
This article is part of our Ask Full Fact series on Brexit, answering your questions about Brexit and the latest negotiations between the UK and the EU.
The integrity of our elections is in danger, and we need your help
You’re probably here looking for facts. Thank you for that trust. But with the EU parliament elections on the way and more elections a possibility, we need to act now to make sure our elections are protected, before it’s too late.
Could you help protect our elections by becoming a Full Fact donor?
Misinformation isn’t new, but advancements in technology mean it can spread at an unprecedented scale. Our dangerously outdated election laws have not kept up with the digital age, putting our next elections at risk of abuse.
Currently, it’s possible for a candidate to run a thousand different political ads to win the same seat, promising something different to each group it targets. At the same time, there’s no law requiring those who publish online campaigns to disclose who they are or how they are funded. The opportunity for bad actors to manipulate election results is left wide open.
You may already know about our work to make public debate online more honest and transparent. Every day, we call out the most harmful misinformation on social media platforms when and where we see it. But right now, we’re urging the government to overhaul our election laws to make sure political campaigning is held to the same level of scrutiny online as it is offline.
This work all depends on the generosity of hundreds of people who all believe that for democracy to work, we need transparency. Our monthly donors help strengthen our voice, and show our politicians that this really matters. Would you consider joining them?
Become a donor today to make sure our elections are protected.