https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/2068269/keir-starmer-risks-shredding-tories

UPDATED: 16:33, Fri, Jun 13, 2025

Environmentalist Zac Goldsmith has raised concerns about a “troubling commitment” in the Prime Minister’s deal with the EU.

Zac Goldsmith has slammed Keir Starmer (Image: Getty)

ac Goldsmith has slammed Keir Starmer’s UK-EU reset for risking the Tories hard-fought Brexit wins on animal welfare. The environmentalist warned that a “troubling commitment” in the agreement means any UK deviation from EU food standards must not “negatively affect European Union animals and goods being placed on the market” in the UK.

The former MP said: “This seemingly technical clause has profound implications for animal welfare and our ability to raise our own standards, something that we fought so hard to achieve with Brexit.  “Among other things it likely means the UK cannot restrict imports of animal products that fail to meet our welfare standards – even when we’ve banned those same practices domestically.

He said around 50% of UK pork imports come from EU countries still using sow stalls – narrow metal cages Britain banned in the 90s because they were considered to be cruel.

A new sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) deal was agreed last month to reduce red tape currently needed to import and export food and drink between the UK and the EU.

ut campaigners want the Government to clarify whether animal welfare measures fall outside the SPS agreement’s scope, or to negotiate explicit exceptions for welfare-based restrictions.

here were concerns before the deal was struck that Britain could weaken its post-Brexit animal protection laws to get a reset deal with Brussels.

But following the concerns, the Prime Minister said: “We are not involved in, nor will we be involved in, a sort of race to the bottom on standards.

“I think that British people are proud of the high standards that we have, and we want to maintain those standards.”

Sir Keir has pledged to strengthen ties with the EU since coming into office on July 4 last year.

As part of the agreement he signed, there will be more targeted checks on the movement of animals, animal products, plants and other products.

This will stop animals being held for excessive periods at the borders and lower any detrimental impact on animal health and welfare, and reduce the burden on the veterinary workforce.

There was also a commitment made on shared disease surveillance and data sharing, which will secure UK biosecurity and risk of imported diseases.

Animal welfare groups also welcomed the introduction of pet passports to replace Animal Health Certificates (AHCs), which increased burden on the veterinary workforce and hiked costs for animal owners since they came into force.

A Government spokesman said: “This government will always act in the national interest to protect Britain’s farmers and secure our food security. We have said we will uphold the highest agricultural standards and that is exactly what this deal does.”

By Lord Zac Goldsmith

Brexit undoubtedly delivered meaningful wins for animals, enabling policy changes that were previously impossible. We were able for example to ban the cruel live export of animals for slaughter and even more far reaching, we could change the way we subsidised farming to incentivise higher animal welfare and environmental stewardship. Neither of these changes could have happened without Brexit, which is one of the reasons I supported our EU exit in 2016.

And although of course I wish we had done more, the last Conservative Government did deliver a wide range of animal welfare measures, from an expanded ivory ban and banning glue traps, to much bigger sentences for animal cruelty and recognising sentience in law. Now in Opposition the Party is calling for among other things raising zoo standards.  

Last month’s UK-EU Summit produced a ‘Common Understanding’ agreement which has been hailed by the Prime Minister as a significant step towards mending post-Brexit relations, generating economic benefits and streamlining trade. However, buried in the details lies a troubling commitment: any UK deviation from EU food standards must not “negatively affect European Union animals and goods being placed on the market in the United Kingdom”.

This seemingly technical clause has profound implications for animal welfare and our ability to raise our own standards, something that we fought so hard to achieve with Brexit. Among other things it likely means the UK cannot restrict imports of animal products that fail to meet our welfare standards – even when we’ve banned those same practices domestically.

Consider the immediate threats. Around 50% of UK pork imports come from EU countries still using sow stalls – narrow metal cages we banned in the 90s because they were considered to be cruel. The last Labour government prohibited fur farming in the UK, yet we continue importing it from the EU. Under the new agreement, banning such imports may be impossible, despite the stated wishes of the Government to deliver the biggest boost to animal welfare in a generation.

The agreement links UK standards to EU animal welfare rules with opt outs limited to public health and biosecurity – assessed case by case basis. So while we might still be able to ban puppy imports, as these present a public health risk, the agreement could block us from banning EU fur or even foie gras on welfare grounds alone.

This not only undermines domestic animal welfare standards but also places British farmers, who adhere to stricter regulations, at a competitive disadvantage. The problem is more acute with EU imports, our largest trading partner for food imports, not just the usual suspects like the USA or Australia.

Brexit gave us the chance to lead the world on animal welfare – to show that an independent Britain could set gold standards that others would follow. This is also about democratic sovereignty; British voters consistently support higher animal welfare standards, with 84% backing restrictions on low-welfare imports.

There’s still time to put this right, but it will require government to clarify that animal welfare measures fall outside the SPS Agreement’s scope, or to negotiate explicit exceptions for welfare-based restrictions.

While its proponents say the UK-EU reset agreement offers economic and diplomatic benefits, it’s imperative that animal welfare remains a priority. By addressing these concerns proactively, the UK can position itself as a global leader in animal welfare and ensure that progress is not achieved at the expense of the most vulnerable and the voiceless.