Paul McCartney has joined forces with U.K. MPs who are urging Brussels to scrap any plans to ban the use of meat-related names such as “burger” and “sausage” for plant-based products. The proposed EU ban, if passed into law, would prohibit food producers from using designations such as “veggie burger” or “vegan sausage” for plant-based and lab-grown dishes. “To stipulate that burgers and sausages are ‘plant-based,’ ‘vegetarian’ or ‘vegan’ should be enough for sensible people to understand what they are eating,” the former Beatles star, who became a vegetarian in 1975, told The Times of London. “This also encourages attitudes essential to our health and that of the planet.” The proposed EU ban “could increase confusion” and “undermine economic growth, sustainability goals, and the EU’s own simplification agenda,” eight British MPs, including Jeremy Corbyn, wrote in a letter to Brussels. The Times reported the contents of the letter Saturday evening. The missive includes the support of the McCartney family, which owns a business selling vegetarian food and recipes. The looming ban stems from an amendment that French center-right MEP Céline Imart introduced into legislation that aims to reform EU farming rules. These proposed reforms include how farmers sign contracts with buyers alongside other technical provisions. The bill is now subject to legislative negotiations with the Council of the EU, which represents EU governments.  The proposed rules will become law if and when MEPs and the Council agree on a final version of the legislation to become EU law. MPs in the U.K. fear that the ban, if it survives, would also impact British supermarkets, as markets and companies across the continent are so closely intertwined. Imart’s burger-busting tweaks were supposed to be a gesture of respect toward the French farmers that she represents — but they have divided MEPs within her own European People’s Party. “A steak is not just a shape,” Imart told POLITICO in an interview last month. “People have eaten meat since the Neolithic. These names carry heritage. They belong to farmers.” Limiting labels for vegetarian producers will also help shoppers understand the difference between a real burger and a plant-based patty, according to Imart, despite years of EU surveys showing consumers largely understand the difference. U.K. MPs also cite research in their letter, stating that European shoppers “overwhelmingly understand and support current naming conventions” such as “veggie burger.”

LONDON — Britain is sleepwalking through its biggest food safety crisis since the horsemeat scandal of 2013, a group of influential MPs warned as they dismissed a recent personal import ban on EU meat and cheese as “toothless.” The government moved in April to prohibit travelers from EU countries from bringing meat and dairy products into the U.K. following an outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease across the continent. However, as reported by POLITICO, the ban has not been fully enforced, with experts warning that U.K. health officials lack the funds to uphold the rules. In a damning report on Monday, the parliament’s Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee warned that “alarming amounts” of meat and dairy products were still being illegally imported for both personal consumption and sale. The committee welcomed the government’s ban on personal imports of meat and dairy from the EU but described it as “toothless,” with prohibited products continuing to enter the U.K. through airports, seaports and the Eurotunnel in freight, parcels, personal baggage and passenger vehicles. “It would not be an exaggeration to say that Britain is sleepwalking through its biggest food safety crisis since the horse meat scandal,” committee chair Alistair Carmichael said. “A still bigger concern is the very real risk of a major animal disease outbreak. The single case of foot-and-mouth disease in Germany this year, most likely caused by illegally imported meat, cost its economy one billion euros.” He urged the government to “get a grip on what has become a crisis” by establishing a national taskforce, boosting food crime intelligence networks, enforcing “real deterrents,” and giving port health and local authorities the resources and powers they need.   During the committee’s nine-month inquiry into animal and plant health, experts painted a gruesome picture of the situation at the border, describing cases of meat arriving in unsanitary conditions, often in the back of vans, stashed in plastic bags, suitcases and cardboard boxes. At the Port of Dover alone, port health officials say they intercepted 70 tons of illegal meat imports from vehicles between January and the end of April, compared with 24 tons during the same period in 2024. During a Public Accounts Committee session on animal disease last week, Emma Miles, director general for food, biosecurity and trade at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, said it was unclear whether the increase in the number of seizures of illegal meat at Dover was due to a rise in crime or to better surveillance. “When you’re catching people it might just mean you are doing better surveillance and enforcement,” she said.

LONDON — Keir Starmer hailed a “landmark deal” with the European Union back in May which he promised would slash red tape. One month on, however, and Starmer’s promises still seem like a distant dream in Northern Ireland, as businesses brace for yet more Brexit paperwork. From July 1, a whole raft of new food products sold in Northern Ireland will have to carry “Not for EU” labels as part of the third and final phase of a controversial labeling rollout. The rules — set out in the Windsor Framework deal between the U.K. and EU — are supposed to ensure that goods are not moved onward from Northern Ireland to the Republic of Ireland, an EU member country. But in light of the U.K. prime minister’s fresh EU deal, businesses are questioning why the new labels should be introduced at all. Under the terms of the deal agreed by Starmer, Britain is preparing to sign up to European single-market regulation on animal and plant health, known as sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) rules, removing the need for the labeling. “We are being required to implement a very cumbersome and onerous regulation from July 1 until the date that the [SPS] deal is put into law, which may only be a matter of months,” said Roger Pollen, head of the Federation of Small Businesses in Northern Ireland.  “There will almost certainly be manufacturers who will say: ‘No, we’re not doing that’, and stop supplying the market, leading to gaps on shelves and broken supply chains, simply because the EU are sticking on a point of principle despite the imminent SPS deal.” ‘FRANKLY FARCICAL’ The labels are deeply controversial for businesses, who claim they are not only off-putting to consumers but costly for manufacturers and “cataclysmic” for food exports.  The latest rollout will cover some fruit and vegetables, fish, and composite products such as pizzas and quiches. Meat and dairy products sold in Northern Ireland already carry the labels. The requirement was originally supposed to apply U.K.-wide, but that plan was scrapped last year following a huge backlash from businesses — with the caveat that they could be reimposed if supplies to Northern Ireland are detrimentally affected.  A senior retail figure, granted anonymity to speak freely, said industry was “furious at the government’s failure to stand up to the EU and demand that retailers be treated as trusted traders. If the U.K. and EU have agreed to align on SPS standards, then it is frankly farcical to proceed with phase-three labeling.” Meat and dairy products sold in Northern Ireland already carry the labels. | Janos Vajda/EPA A spokesperson for the Cabinet Office, tasked with the implementation of the Windsor Framework, acknowledged that the need for the labels would likely be “diminished” as a result of any SPS agreement. “In the meantime,” they said, “it is important to implement the existing arrangements for the Windsor Framework and we will continue to work closely with businesses across the United Kingdom to support them in implementing these arrangements.” That message was hammered home at a recent meeting of the Specialised Committee on the Implementation of the Windsor Framework — co-chaired by the U.K. government and the European Commission — where both sides reiterated their commitment to the “full, timely and faithful implementation of the Windsor Framework,” including the “correct implementation of the labelling safeguards.”  A Commission spokesperson said suspending the implementation of the Windsor Framework until an SPS agreement is reached “creates risks for the integrity of the EU internal market, which the EU does not accept. It is important to recall that the EU and the U.K. currently have different SPS rules. “Honouring existing agreements is a question of good faith, this is why the EU and the U.K. both committed to the full, timely and faithful implementation of existing international agreements between them,” they added. ‘EU HAS SHOWN NO COMPROMISE’ But the lack of flexibility has left industry disappointed — and in some cases blaming the EU.   “The EU has shown no compromise and insisted on ‘full and faithful’ implementation of the rules despite agreeing to probably remove them in the near future,” the retail figure said. “The government’s failure to resist this unreasonable behavior is extremely disappointing and U.K. consumers will end up bearing the costs [with] increased prices.” Pollen agreed. “The only people who can actually step in and be magnanimous about this are the EU and they’ve resolutely refused to do that so far.  “I think they should just be pragmatic and say: Look, we’ve reached this overarching agreement on SPS with the U.K. On that basis we are not going to require businesses supplying Northern Ireland to have to go ahead with phase-three labeling for a grace period of a year to 18 months. “Then, if the deal is ‘papered up’ in law by that stage, this bureaucratic labeling won’t be required at all.”  But a figure close to discussions about the future of the scheme — granted anonymity to speak freely — called for realistic expectations of when an SPS deal was likely to happen. “First of all, the U.K. needs to align itself to EU standards, where it has diverged,” they said. For example, the U.K. has authorized emergency use of certain pesticides that are banned in the EU. Some suppliers may decide to drop out of the Northern Ireland market altogether. | Mark Marlow/EPA “Then, on the EU side, the Commission will not have their mandate to get into technical discussions from the European Council until at least mid-Autumn and the European Parliament will want some sort of input into the technical process.  “Either way, those things aren’t going to happen overnight, and while relationships from the political agreement are still buoyant, the technical discussion will be much more intense and fervent.” ‘THROUGH-THE-LOOKING-GLASS POLICY’ Despite industry’s concerns, retailers are generally “well prepared — especially when it comes to own-brand products,” the same senior retail figure quoted earlier said. But they added that there are still a “considerable number of suppliers, including sizable brands who are not ready, and who don’t want to play ball.” While some suppliers may decide to drop out of the Northern Ireland market altogether, others are getting round the issue by bringing unlabeled goods through the “red lane,” a customs channel for goods entering Northern Ireland from Great Britain that are intended to move into the EU, where they face full EU customs checks. The absurdity isn’t lost on Pollen. “They [businesses] are prepared to go through that added bureaucracy just to ease a different type of bureaucracy. It’s through-the-looking-glass policy.” With the U.K. and EU unlikely to budge on labeling any time soon, Rod Addy, director general of the Provision Trade Federation, which represents food processing, manufacturing and trading companies, is pinning his hopes on a swift SPS deal.    “Our view would be that the government and industry need to quickly identify the most important sticking points and come up with quick fixes so the deal can be pushed through relatively quickly and business and government can enjoy the benefits in months, not years,” he said. 

LONDON — They always come crawling back. Following a messy divorce with the EU, the U.K. had banked on its “special relationship” with the U.S. forming the cornerstone of its post-Brexit “Global Britain” foreign policy. Now London is reassessing its options. As U.S. President Donald Trump takes the world economy on a rollercoaster with his unpredictable tariff regime, Britain’s Labour government is increasingly turning to old flames like the EU and India. But securing any meaningful agreements will take more than just good will on the U.K. side, as it faces having to make concessions that are deeply unpopular at home.   Addressing carmakers in the West Midlands on Monday after the U.S. slapped the industry with 25 percent tariffs, a resilient Prime Minister Keir Starmer insisted Britain would “keep calm and fight for the best deal with the U.S.” “But we’re also going to work with our key partners to reduce barriers to trade across the globe,” he said. “Accelerate trade deals with the rest of the world and champion the cause of free and open trade — right across the globe. And just like car building, that has always been our heritage — and we won’t turn our backs on it now.” Free trade talks with India and the Gulf Cooperation Council are the most advanced, while revamped deals with Switzerland, South Korea, Israel and Turkey are also in the works. The U.K. is also making steady progress on a post-Brexit “reset” with the EU ahead of a major EU-U.K. summit in May. Speaking earlier this week, Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said the U.K. had “leveraged the difficult situation with the U.S. to advance all these talks.” It’s a far cry from Labour’s rhetoric pre-election, when it insisted it would be taking a more minimalist approach to free-trade agreements.  THE ONE THAT GOT AWAY Trump’s escalating trade war — as well as his moves to distance himself from Europe’s security — have given added impetus to U.K. plans to “reset” its sometimes fraught relationship with the European Union. Speaking on Wednesday, Chancellor Rachel Reeves said the new international reality made a tighter relationship with Brussels “imperative,” arguing that there was scope to improve the situation for British businesses who “feel shut out of European markets.” What this actually looks like will become clearer on May 19 when EU leaders decamp to London for a major summit on cross-channel relations.  So far, a new U.K.-EU security pact has emerged as the key agenda item. While it’s at an early concept stage, such an agreement could create new opportunities for joint investments in arms, as well as for closer cross-channel cooperation between U.K. and EU defense industrial firms. London is also keen to sign a U.K.-EU veterinary deal that would reduce border checks on trade by harmonizing standards for animal and plant health. Brussels is open to the idea but has warned it would likely require the U.K. to peg itself to EU standards.  Improvements on trade in services are also in Starmer’s sights, notably the mutual recognition of professional qualifications and simpler conditions for British artists touring in the EU. All these asks are complicated by Labour’s red lines that rule out participation in the EU single market, customs union or free movement. Trump’s trade wars have also created another more urgent incentive for the U.K. to rekindle its relationship with Brussels. A complicated post-Brexit settlement in Northern Ireland means EU retaliatory tariffs on the U.S. will apply in the territory, creating a fresh headache for importers in the region.  Addressing MPs on Tuesday, Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn dangled the possibility of an improved trade deal with the EU as a potential remedy. “Members from Northern Ireland have on many occasions raised the consequences of the current arrangement,” he said, adding that things could “get a lot easier” if the U.K. secures a veterinary agreement. FROM FIZZLE TO SIZZLE Another key priority for British negotiators is wrapping up talks with India. New Delhi’s Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman visited London this week for negotiations with British Chancellor Rachel Reeves and trade chief Jonathan Reynolds. Alongside trade talks, the two sides are also pushing to sign a bilateral investment treaty. “There is a great sense of positivity and also eagerness and dedication to have this concluded sooner rather than later from both the sides,” Sitharaman told reporters at a joint briefing following the discussions. But Trump’s trade war won’t see India “rush” into a deal, Sitharaman told an audience at India’s High Commission the day before. While she and Reeves both said progress was made, thorny issues remain.  The U.S. tariffs mean that striking a deal “has gone up the scale in terms of political priorities,” Shashi Tharoor, chair of the Indian parliament’s committee on external affairs, told POLITICO. “We all need buffers against the global trade uncertainties that have suddenly shot up in people’s consciousness,” he added. Yet Tharoor points to several “stumbling blocks” remaining in the talks, including business mobility visas, the U.K.’s plans to tax Indian steel and other high carbon emissions commodities at the border, and intellectual property. British officials took an upbeat tone this week, telling the Guardian that visa mobility issues had largely been resolved. But one person close to negotiations, granted anonymity to speak freely, said that was “not so accurate.” “We would simply like larger quotas for professionals, particularly in sectors like IT and healthcare,” Tharoor added. “But [U.K.] domestic political concerns about foreigners coming into the country would certainly be a stymying factor. So if the U.K. can’t give in on those areas as much as India would like, then what else can the U.K. offer?” If Delhi and London are able to strike a deal, he said, both countries “should, in theory, be able to double” their annual bilateral trade of $50 billion. “But that requires a lot more flexibility on both sides,” he said. Still, British officials were buoyed by Reynolds’ visit to Delhi to re-launch negotiations in February, after they fizzled out under the previous Conservative government over similar concerns over issues like migration and better access for services firms. Officials have told businesses of a “step change” in talks since the visit, said a senior British business representative briefed on the negotiations, who was granted anonymity to speak on the sensitive talks. “There’s a sense that the Indian government just wants to get something done and over the line now,” they said. “That may be part of their sense about where the geopolitics is. You need the extra trade growth from wherever you can get it.” A GULF APART Things are also heating up between the U.K. and the Gulf Cooperation Council trading bloc — a six-member bloc including Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and United Arab Emirates — as the countries negotiate a free trade agreement. While rounds are no longer being formally counted, there has been a flurry of activity since Labour resumed talks in September 2024, with a GCC delegation visiting London in January and the U.K.’s chief negotiator visiting Riyadh in February. In more recent months, however, the focus has moved away from an FTA toward plugging investment opportunities.  But appetite for a full-fat FTA seems to have returned post-tariffs. In a sign of Britain’s willingness to strike a deal, Starmer on Wednesday put in a call to Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, where the PM “reiterated his commitment to working closely with international partners to maintain global economic stability.” Tellingly, the leaders also “agreed to build on the good progress so far on the U.K.-GCC free trade agreement.” A figure briefed on negotiations told POLITICO: “There’s always been quite a deep appetite for a GCC deal even before Trump. It’s now just got added priority. I would have thought the U.K. needs this deal, so they’re going to roll over a bit more. The quicker you can get this one in place, the better. Because it’s a big market.” But if successful, Labour would have a hard time selling any deal to its traditional union base, which has voiced serious concerns about the environmental record and human rights abuses in Gulf countries. HEY CANADA, U UP? The U.K. has shown an interest in reopening trade talks with Canada, which is bearing the brunt of Trump’s tariff raid. It was former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau who first raised the prospect of resurrecting talks with the U.K., which collapsed under the previous Conservative government after a long-running battle by Canadian farmers to get hormone-treated beef into Britain.  In an interview with POLITICO earlier this year, Canadian High Commissioner to the U.K. Ralph Goodale said the U.K. and Canada have a “great opportunity and a great reason to work really hard at trade diversification,” in light of U.S. tariffs.   He called on the U.K. to get back to the negotiating table after London walked away from bilateral trade talks last January. “It would be helpful to take another go at that and see what we can accomplish in the shortest possible time,” Goodale said. “If we can add on to it, so much the better.”  The U.K. has confirmed it is considering the proposal, but has yet to give it the green light. PLAYING THE FIELD While the U.K. continues to deepen its ties with trading partners, it hasn’t given up hope of securing a deal with the U.S. One government figure — granted anonymity to speak freely — said the key areas of negotiation, at least in the short term, are now set to be around the steep sectoral tariffs of 25 percent on steel and automobiles.  But given how unpredictable Trump’s tariff policy has been in recent months, the U.K. would be wise not to pin all its hopes on the possibility of a deal.  In an abrupt turn, Trump last night announced a 90-day pause on the implementation of higher reciprocal tariffs, with the exception of China, leaving trade negotiators across the globe scratching their heads as to what could come next. For now, playing the field might be the U.K.’s best option. Andrew McDonald contributed reporting.