This morning on the Today programme I heard an exchange which prompts a simple question. Here is a brief extract in transcript (I would have done more, but there were so many interruptions that it was hard for an amateur to be accurate).
Sarah Smith: Six of the world's fastest growing economies are in Africa, which means there may be significant economic opportunities there for the UK as we seek to expand our trade relationships outside the European Union. The prime minister has just begun a three day three nation trip to South Africa, Kenya and Nigeria to talk trade and aid, and she's accompanied by the Minister for Africa, Harriet Baldwin. I asked her whether there really was time to negotiate bilateral trade agreements with each African nation we want to do business with after Brexit.
Harriet Baldwin: I think there is scope as we leave the European Union for us to be doing much more in terms of bilateral trade. It's already the case that there's some £30bn worth of trade between the UK and African economies, but given how dynamic, how fast growing these economies are, I'm really excited about the ambition to do much more.
Smith: But many of the African countries we deal with will want to trade on completely different terms. They're particularly annoyed about huge import tariffs that there are on sugar, also on rice, maize and other cereals - 50% on some of these goods. They'll want to renegotiate that. Can we tell them that we're going to eliminate those tariffs on agricultural products?
Baldwin: Well, as you know, under the Economic Partnering Arrangements there is tariff-free trade on a lot of areas already with the EU. We aim to be at least...
Smith: But not on food.
Baldwin: ...at least as ambitious on that. As far as food is concerned you're absolutely right, I think there is scope for UK consumers and African exporters to benefit from the UK's decision to leave the European Union but ...
Smith: But there will [unclear, talking over] be tariffs on agricultural exports from Africa.
Baldwin: We aim to be at least as strong as we are now in terms of the Economic Partnering Arrangements so I do think...
Smith: [keeps going, repeating the assertion about high tariffs and including a mention of a tariff of over 300% on processed sugar, and all Baldwin could say was "we aim to do at least as well"]
A few observations:
1. As an EU member state, we have Economic Partnership Agreements (not partnering arrangements), either fully in place, being implemented or in negotiation with a number of African countries and regional trading groups.
2. Under these agreements (with a few exceptions) and the Everything But Arms scheme (which covers the least developed countries, many of which are in Africa) no tariffs and no quotas are applied to any imported products (except guns and ammunition, as the name implies). The simplest summary is probably here: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2017/november/tradoc_156399.pdf
3. If no tariffs are charged on a product, it's hard to see how consumers or exporters could benefit from their removal (or indeed how the exporting countries can be said to be "particularly annoyed" about them). Also, according to all the announcements so far from Michael Gove and others, there's no prospect of standards for agricultural imports changing in the foreseeable future.
4. Neither interviewee nor interviewer was aware of these facts, though Ms Baldwin did appear to have some grasp of the EPAs.
5. Numerous specialists in trade, law and European politics were exasperated by the inaccuracies exhibited here. I saw them on Twitter, but I have no doubt that phone calls were being made, letters written etc.
My simple question is this: What briefing - nay, training - should ministers, journalists, presenters on the nation's supposed flagship news programme, and MPs have received in preparation for this process - travelling to a trading partner, the negotiation, the preparation and debate, the referendum campaign itself?
And an even simpler question: What briefing did you get?
Ed Wilson
