About Chloe Anthony

This author has not yet filled in any details.
So far Chloe Anthony has created 18 blog entries.

Briefing Paper 47 – CAN THE UK GOVERNMENT BE ‘WORLD-LEADING’ IN BOTH TRADE AND CLIMATE POLICY?

The UK is the first major economy to commit to a net-zero emissions by 2050 climate target, and it also has ambitious trade policy goals of providing multilateral leadership and concluding major new trade agreements. This Briefing Paper examines the coherence of UK trade and climate goals in regards to whether the UK Government has set out a clear strategy for integrating trade and climate policy, is acting on areas of mutual supportiveness, and is addressing areas of potential conflict. The authors find room for improvement in relation to all three areas. They identify a lack of cross-cutting strategy in UK climate legislation and in its approach to free trade agreements,  and suggest the UK reforms its approach to fossil fuel subsidies and builds on its efforts in regard to environmental goods. Finally, the authors underscore the need for ambition and transparency for green subsidies and carbon pricing. Read Briefing Paper 47: CAN THE UK GOVERNMENT BE ‘WORLD-LEADING’ IN BOTH TRADE AND CLIMATE POLICY

By , |2024-11-20T13:09:51+00:001 September 2020|Briefing Papers|0 Comments

BP 38 – Destruction of the Union: too high a price to pay for a US trade agreement

Download Briefing Paper 38 Briefing Paper 38 – December 2019 Emily Lydgate, Chloe Anthony, Erik Millstone Key Points Introduction The current state of affairs What will replace the EU and allow for a UK ‘Single Market’? The UK’s alternative futures Policy recommendations Footnotes Key points: A UK-US trade agreement would likely require changes to UK domestic legislation in very sensitive areas, including drug pricing and food safety regulation, which Scotland, with its large Remain-voting majority and stated desire to maintain alignment with EU regulation, would strenuously oppose. Leaving the EU creates a legal and policy vacuum regarding the relationship between devolved nations, and the extent to which they can influence UK trade negotiations. By not taking Scotland’s interests sufficiently into consideration, the UK risks fuelling the Scottish independence movement and/or introducing internal trade barriers between England, Wales and Scotland (Northern Ireland will be subject to separate arrangements anyway). The UK Government may be forced to choose between facilitating trade with the US or holding on to the UK’s fragile national identity. The destruction of the UK internal market – and potentially the Union itself – seems too high a price to pay for a US Free Trade Agreement. [...]

By , , |2025-12-12T11:45:24+00:0010 December 2019|Comments Off on BP 38 – Destruction of the Union: too high a price to pay for a US trade agreement

Briefing Paper 38 – DESTRUCTION OF THE UNION: TOO HIGH A PRICE TO PAY FOR A US TRADE AGREEMENT

The importance of EU rules to maintaining open borders within Ireland has been at the centre of UK and EU negotiations. Yet what is less appreciated is the significance of those rules for achieving frictionless trade between England, Scotland and Wales. In this Briefing Paper, the authors highlight that leaving the EU could create new border trade barriers inside the UK, and opens up questions about how – and whether – the devolved nations will unite with England on external trade agreements. They argue that a US trade negotiation poses a serious threat to the unity of the United Kingdom because it would likely require changes to UK domestic legislation in very sensitive areas, including drug pricing and food safety regulation, which Scotland, with its large Remain-voting majority and stated desire to maintain alignment with EU regulation, would strenuously oppose. The authors argue that devolved nations should have a formal role in the setting of UK negotiating objectives, to ensure, among other things, that external trade agreements do not lead to internal trade barriers. Read Briefing Paper 38: DESTRUCTION OF THE UNION: TOO HIGH A PRICE TO PAY FOR A US TRADE AGREEMENT

By , , |2024-11-20T13:15:17+00:001 December 2019|Briefing Papers|0 Comments

Briefing Paper 37 – BREXIT FOOD SAFETY LEGISLATION AND POTENTIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR UK TRADE: THE DEVIL IN THE DETAILS

As set out in the EU Withdrawal Act (2018) the government’s approach to Brexit is to transfer EU law into UK law and address any deficiencies in that law by secondary legislation. This Briefing Paper examines post-Brexit food safety legislation and finds that the UK’s post-Brexit  safety rules fall short of the level of protection currently provided by the EU and, in some cases, they give ministers broad discretion to make future changes without full parliamentary scrutiny.  This would provide a relatively clear path for a UK Prime Minister to overcome parliamentary opposition to any new trade agreements that cover agricultural and food products, such as US-UK FTA. Also, Brexit food safety legislation allows for devolution which could undermine both the UK’s ability to undertake a unified approach to external trade agreements and also the maintenance of the UK’s internal free movement of goods. Read Briefing Paper 37 BREXIT FOOD SAFETY LEGISLATION AND POTENTIAL IMPLICATIONS FOR UK TRADE: THE DEVIL IN THE DETAILS

By , , |2024-11-20T13:15:39+00:002 November 2019|Briefing Papers|0 Comments

BP 37 – Brexit food safety legislation and potential implications for UK trade: The devil in the details

Download Briefing Paper 37 Briefing Paper 37 – November 2019 Emily Lydgate, Chloe Anthony and Erik Millstone Key Points Introduction Preparing UK Food Safety Legislation For Brexit Deep Regulatory Reform, Not a Technical Exercise Will The UK Agricultural and Food Safety and Standards Legislation be Functionally Equivalent to That of The EU? Pesticide Approvals and Maximum Residue Levels in Food and Feed GMO Authorisations and Labelling Food Additive Authorisations and Monitoring Micro-Biological Food Safety Trade Implications Conclusions Recommendations Footnotes Key points The Government’s approach, as set out in the EU Withdrawal Act (2018), is to transfer EU law into UK law and address any ‘deficiencies’ in that law (such as references to EU institutions) by secondary legislation. This has resulted in a large body of new food safety legislation that replaces EU legislative processes and institutions with those of the UK. Detaching UK food safety regulation from EU bodies, while maintaining agricultural and food systems that are no less harmful to the environment and public health, is a challenging task. This is because the UK must develop capacities, competencies and procedures that have not been required or available domestically for many years. It is thus implausible to suggest, [...]

By , , |2025-12-12T10:54:33+00:001 November 2019|Comments Off on BP 37 – Brexit food safety legislation and potential implications for UK trade: The devil in the details

UK food safety Statutory Instruments: A problem for US-UK negotiations?

12 September 2019 Chloe Anthony and Dr Emily Lydgate – lecturer in Law at the University of Sussex and a fellow of the UK Trade Policy Observatory. The US remains top of the list of post-Brexit UK trade negotiations, with Boris Johnson recently putting a quick US deal as a first priority. The US’s strongly-worded negotiating objectives include loosening EU ‘non-science-based’ bans or restrictions on Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), pesticides, food additives, hormone-enhanced meat, in addition to the infamous chlorinated chicken. As former international trade secretary Liam Fox conceded, a US-UK Free Trade Agreement (FTA) that excludes food and agriculture is a non-starter from the US perspective. […]

By , |2025-07-18T11:09:05+01:0012 September 2019|UK - Non EU|1 Comment

A look at new UK pesticides regulation: Part 2

16 July 2019 Chloe Anthony, Ffion Thomas, and Dr Emily Lydgate – lecturer in Law at the University of Sussex and a fellow of the UK Trade Policy Observatory. In May we published a blog analysing the EU Exit statutory instruments (SIs) on pesticides prepared under the EU Withdrawal Act 2018. One of the key concerns that we raised was that EU restrictions on pesticides with endocrine disrupting properties had been deleted. After this omission was identified, DEFRA responded very swiftly, clarifying that the deletion had been accidental and releasing a new Statutory Instrument (SI). […]

By , |2025-07-18T11:14:32+01:0016 July 2019|UK- EU|0 Comments

Not just a technical exercise: a look at new UK pesticides regulation

15 May 2019 Chloe Anthony, Ffion Thomas and Emily Lydgate In this blog, we take a closer look at the legislation that is being used to bring existing EU pesticide regulations into UK law in preparation for leaving the EU. We find that departures from EU pesticides legislation are significant. The new legislation consolidates powers to UK ministers to amend, revoke and make pesticide legislation and weakens both enforcement arrangements and the requirement to obtain scientific advice. […]

By , |2025-07-18T11:24:52+01:0015 May 2019|UK- EU|11 Comments
Go to Top