Free Trade Agreement: US and EU

Lord Anderson of Swansea Excerpts
Thursday 23rd October 2014

(9 years, 6 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Asked by
Lord Anderson of Swansea Portrait Lord Anderson of Swansea
- Hansard - -



To ask Her Majesty’s Government what assessment they have made of the prospects for the free trade agreement between the United States and the European Union.

Lord Livingston of Parkhead Portrait The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills & Foreign and Commonwealth Office (Lord Livingston of Parkhead) (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, we are pushing for a broad agreement that eliminates the vast majority of tariffs and reduces other unnecessary barriers to trade. This will help small businesses in particular and promote growth and jobs. There have been seven rounds of negotiations with good progress, given that it is slightly over a year since the negotiations started. We are aiming for an ambitious agreement in 2015.

Lord Anderson of Swansea Portrait Lord Anderson of Swansea (Lab)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, the Minister will be well aware that at the EU Council meeting in June 2013 the French won a signal victory by using their political veto under the cultural exemption to exclude audio-visual services from the negotiating mandate because they considered them a matter of national interest. I should also mention that the Commission was given leave to produce further changes to the negotiating mandate. Do we consider the National Health Service to be a key national interest? If so, have we tried to exclude our health service from the investment provisions? If not, why not?

Lord Livingston of Parkhead Portrait Lord Livingston of Parkhead
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The difference between the NHS and audio-visual services is that audio-visual services were included originally, whereas the NHS was always exempted. It is probably best if I quote the EU Trade Commissioner on the matter:

“Public services are always exempted—there is no problem about exemption. The argument is abused in your country for political reasons but it has no grounds”.