|
|
Mr Fox also wants to set up an independent UK “trade remedies authority” to investigate “anti-dumping” cases after Brexit, but he will reserve the right to overrule the authority’s recommendations to take retaliatory action against trading partners.
Trade defence measures, such as higher tariffs or quotas, have historically been decided in Brussels by representatives of all 28 EU member states, allowing Britain to duck difficult decisions by “hiding behind” other countries.
But under the trade bill, which will have its second reading in the House of Commons on January 9, British ministers will have to deal with the problem of whether to retaliate if a trade partner “dumps” heavily subsidised or artificially low-priced goods on the UK market.[...]
Under the trade bill, however, UK trade secretaries would have to balance the interests of British steel producers against those of consumers. They would also have to consider whether a possible trade war with China was against Britain’s strategic interest in building ties with Beijing.
Lord Mandelson, a former EU trade commissioner and business secretary, said Beijing would be less likely to fear reprisals from Britain acting on its own than if the EU retaliated. “I’m sure China et al are quaking in their boots,” he said.
Mr Fox’s trade bill also proposes a nine-member “trade remedies authority” to advise the secretary of state on anti-dumping cases.
The authority could take up a case following complaints from businesses or consumer groups. If the body concluded that no action should be taken against a third country, the secretary of state would have to accept that verdict.
However, under the proposals, Mr Fox or his successors would be able to ignore the authority’s calls for anti-dumping measures if such moves were deemed to be against Britain’s “wider economic interests”. [...]
Full article on Financial Times (subscription required)