UK Lawmakers Warn UK Agreements with Donald Trump are 'Built on Sand'.

Ministers and senior MPs have expressed alarm that the United Kingdom's series of deals with Washington are "built on sand." This stems from revelations that a much-touted deal on medicines, which pledges zero tariffs in exchange for the NHS increasing its costs, lacks any formal legal text beyond vague headline terms published in government press releases.

Lacking Legal Footing

The deal on drug tariffs, hailed as a "generational" achievement, exists as an "agreement in principle" without a signed legal text. It has been highlighted that the official announcements from the UK and US governments present the deal in divergent terms. The British version celebrates securing "duty-free access" as a unique achievement, while the American announcement highlights the agreement for the NHS to pay 25% more for new medications.

"We face a genuine possibility that the UK government has agreed to terms to increase medicine costs in return for little more than a pledge from President Trump," said David Henig, a trade expert. "History shows he has a record of not keeping promises."

A Pattern of Unreliability

Concerns have been intensified by Washington's recent decision to suspend the major technology agreement, which was previously heralded as "a transformative pact" in the bilateral relationship. The US pointed to a lack of progress from the UK on reducing other tariffs as the reason for the pause.

Additionally, concessions promised for British farmers as part of an May trade agreement have still not been formally approved by the US, despite a fast-approaching January deadline. "Our understanding is that the US has failed to approve the agreed beef export quotas," said Tom Bradshaw of the National Farmers' Union.

Private Ministerial Concerns

Privately, ministers have expressed concerns that the government's deals with Washington are unstable and unpredictable. One minister was quoted as stating the series of agreements as "built on sand," while another characterized the situation as the "new normal" in the transatlantic relationship, marked by "greater risk and fluctuation."

Layla Moran, a senior MP on the health committee, stated: "Perhaps most shocking than the US approach is the UK government's optimistic assumption that his administration is a trustworthy negotiator. The NHS is too precious to be gambled with."

A Mixed Picture of Success and Setback

Ministry sources have sought to reduce the chances of the US withdrawing from the pharmaceuticals deal. One source suggested the US pharmaceutical industry itself had been pushing for the agreement, wanting clarity on imports and pricing, making it more concrete than the paused tech deal.

Officials concede that instability is part and parcel of dealing with the Trump administration. However, they maintain that the UK has achieved real benefits for businesses, such as reduced duties on automobiles compared to other nations. "Our achievement of 25% steel tariffs, which is more favorable than the rate for the rest of the world, is not flimsy," one official said.

However, issues have arisen in enacting the initial US-UK accord. Promised reciprocal agricultural allowances have failed to be approved, and the pledge to "eliminate duties on UK metals" has is still pending, with tariffs fixed at 25%.

Looking ahead, the two sides have agreed to resume talks on the paused tech prosperity deal in January, following what were described as "very positive" meetings between UK and US officials in Washington.