Britain continues to firmly reject American chicken and any free trade agreement that would allow imports of the product, despite the pending move to leave the European Union and the need to negotiate trade deals with other countries.
This is because most American poultry is disinfected in a chlorine dioxide or chlorite-based rinse designed to protect consumers from undesirable microorganisms. These pathogen reduction treatments face opposition, particularly from the European Union.
UK Secretary of State for Environment Michael Gove insists that any future trade agreement is contingent on prohibition of chlorine-washed chicken, or else, he suggested, we can “kiss goodbye to [a] trade deal.” But how unsafe are American poultry products? After all, pathogen reduction treatments (PRTs) have been mandated for most American meat products since 1996.
Although the EU banned PRTs in 1997, these products have not been shown to cause harm. Americans consume about 156 million chickens every week. The Codex Alimentarius Commission, an international food regulator, determined that U.S. safety procedures have reduced salmonella prevalence from 14 percent to 2 percent.
Despite standing PRT restrictions, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has determined that for treated chicken to be considered unsafe, people would have to consume more than 5% of their body weight in chicken per day. For someone weighing 200 pounds, that is 10 pounds of chicken, an unlikely amount.
Drinking water poses a far more significant risk, as it contributes 99% of the average American’s daily chlorine byproduct intake. The maximum threshold for health to be unaffected by chlorine in drinking water is 4 parts per million (ppm). For context, a liter of water which weighs one million milligrams would require more than four milligrams of chlorine to be unsafe. Most chlorinated drinking water currently contains between 0.2 and 1 ppm (at most a quarter of the allowable amount.)
Treated chickens, however, are usually soaked in chilled water with a concentration of up to 50 ppm, then rinsed in water with a much lower concentration so as to maintain compliance with the 3 ppm limit of residual chlorination.
The UK is also voicing concerns regarding the inclusion of hormone-treated beef in potential trade agreements. The EU introduced a ban on hormone-treated meat in 1981, which has since been amended to prohibit fewer types of hormones. Research from non-EU governments as well as from the private sector has repeatedly produced evidence indicating that there is no real threat to health from consumption of hormone-treated beef.
Why are American chicken and beef a problem for Britain? Agriculture lobbies in both the United States and the UK historically wield an enormous amount of political power. This power has been used to end meat and agriculture-safety regulation proposals, discourage genetically-modified foods, acquire or reform farm subsidies, and influence trade deals. By restricting most American chicken and beef from entering UK markets, the UK agricultural business successfully deters competition, which could undercut their prices.
Regardless of the agricultural lobby, the UK cannot afford to sacrifice a post-Brexit trade deal with the United States. America is the United Kingdom’s largest export partner and second largest import partner. Nearly 1.4 million Britons are directly employed by U.S. affiliates. Exports to America from the UK have an estimated value of $54 billion and contribute significantly to UK employment.
Trade between Britain and the rest of the EU supports around 3.6 million UK jobs. While Brexit does not guarantee closed doors, there are likely to be trade ramifications to trimming political ties, some of which may already be present.
The UK ought to rethink its stipulated PRT and hormone prohibitions. A successful UK-US free-trade agreement would expand UK trade. Furthermore, lifting the ban on these products would allow the UK to tap into markets that are not available as EU members.
Opening the door to American chicken and beef does not mean that all British consumers will buy these products. The beauty of free trade is letting people make their own choices.
Haley Skinner is a contributor to Economics21.
Interested in real economic insights? Want to stay ahead of the competition? Each weekday morning, e21 delivers a short email that includes e21 exclusive commentaries and the latest market news and updates from Washington. Sign up for the e21 Morning Ebrief.
iStock