House of Commons Debate: Cross-Party MPs United on Protection for British Standards and Farmers in Trade

MPs from five parties called on the UK Government to close a loophole amidst increase in imports from banned production systems. The move follows warnings that British standards and farmers could be sacrificed in the pursuit of an EU-UK veterinary deal.

A major House of Commons debate on 22 January heard that the UK could be offshoring animal cruelty and undercutting British Farmers, as the Government faces simultaneous pressure to trade away food standards for a US tech deal and lock the UK into lower EU baselines in its post-Brexit "reset."

The debate, the first Commons debate secured on an animal welfare issue since 2017, was on “the impact of import standards on the agricultural sector” led by North West Cambridgeshire Labour MP Sam Carling, supported by Animal Policy International. It highlighted the scale of the "standards gap" currently facing the UK:

• Sow Stalls: While sow stalls have not been used in Britain since 1999, 97% of UK pork imports now come from countries where they remain legal.

• Live Lamb Cutting: Imports of Australian sheep meat—where "mulesing" (cutting skin from live lambs) is common practice—have increased by 162% since the signing of the UK-Australia FTA.

• Battery Cages: 900,000 hens are currently being farmed in battery cages in the Ukraine, banned in Britain, to supply the UK market, often hidden in the catering and manufacturing sectors where consumers have no way of knowing what they’re buying. These products were recently found on sale at Smithfield Market explicitly labelled as “No-UK Standard.”

MPs from Labour, Conservative, Greens, Liberal Democrats and Plaid Cymru spoke, with broad consensus on the imports problem. 

Sam Carling MP who led the debate, said, "The government has been clear that worsening our animal welfare standards and allowing import of low welfare goods is a red line for us. We're not going to do it, and that's positive. But that leaves us the question of why don't we legislate to make sure of it. Change has support across the board. It has the support of rural organisations, like the NFU, and animal welfare bodies like Animal Policy International, both of whom I want to thank for their ongoing research in this area.”

Lee Pitcher MP, Labour said, “We need stronger equivalents in our import standards. If a product cannot be produced here under the rules, it should not be able to undercut our farmers on our shelves.”

EU deal risks locking UK into lower standards

Mentioned in the debate was the unfairness of imports, the importance of labelling, and the risk posed by an unfavourable UK-EU deal. MPs warned that the UK could be prevented from introducing future import bans on practices deemed too cruel in the UK, or even bar the labelling of imported products with methods of production.

For the Conservatives, Dr Neil Hudson MP, Shadow Minister for DEFRA said, “....keenness to merge with the EU standards is worrying, especially on animal welfare, where our standards in the UK are higher. Returning to eu regulatory alignment would make us rule takers not rulemakers”.

For the Liberal Democrats, Sarah Dyke MP spoke about how the Liberal Democrats are calling for the “Swiss Model”, which would allow the UK to limit imports that don’t meet our standards.

Responding for the Government, Minister of State Angela Eagle MP insisted that the UK would not sacrifice standards on the "altar of trade deals," pointing to the recent UK-India deal where the Government maintained tariffs on pork and poultry due to welfare concerns, saying, “We used the powers we have and we will do so again. This government will not allow that legacy [of animal welfare] to be undermined through the backdoor by trade policy. We will protect our farmers, uphold our standards and back British food at home and abroad.”

However, Animal Policy International warned that without a carve-out for imports in the EU agreement, these promises remain unenforceable.

Tashi Thomas, Head of UK Policy at Animal Policy International (API), said: “The Government has a real opportunity here. It can choose to be a global leader in welfare, or it can risk locking us into lower standards through the EU reset. If it is too cruel to produce here, it should be too cruel to import. Every time we allow battery-cage eggs or sow-stall pork onto our shelves, we are offshoring practices that the British public has already rejected. We need a legislative guarantee that our borders are not a backdoor for cruelty.”

Read the full media release.