TOI correspondent from London: MPs of all political parties criticised the UK-India FTA at a debate in the House of Commons on Monday, with shadow trade secretary Andrew Griffith saying: “Instead of a vindaloo of a deal, the PM came back with a bag of soggy poppadums.”Trade minister Chris Bryant defended the deal, saying UK businesses saw it as a “fine tandoori”, pointing out that by 2050, India will be home to more than a quarter of a billion high-income consumers offering a huge market to UK exporters.But the deal came under fire from all sides of the House for failing to include UK services, especially legal services, for allowing Indian workers and their employers to evade paying National Insurance for three years, which was “undercutting British workers”; for taking five to 10 years before British goods exporters see tariff reductions, whilst Indian goods exporters will see them immediately; for failing to agree a bilateral investment treaty; and also for failing to have enforceable clauses on human rights and labour standards.There were concerns the UK would get flooded with cheap Indian imports. MP Iqbal Mohamed said the UK govt should “pursue an economic diplomacy that recognises the importance of religious tolerance”.Concerns were raised over complex state-level regulations in India, and Griffith even raised the plight of “poor blinded prawns” who, he said, would become “victims under this deal”.The double contributions convention (DCC) received the most criticism. Griffith said: “It could be up to £10,000 a year cheaper to hire a software developer on an average British salary from India than to hire someone from Britain for the same role.” Griffith said the Indian govt “boasted about” this at the time the deal was signed whereas it was not even mentioned by the UK govt.DCC agreements are usually struck by the UK with countries that “have compatible economies, similar educational outcomes and comparable social security systems, such as Japan and Canada. India stands alone as by far the largest and least wealthy country on the list”, Conservative MP Katie Lam said. “We have already seen this model take hold in the US. The result has been a massive expansion in the number of lower-cost Indian workers at the expense of American workers.”However Bryant said Indian workers and their employers would face other charges, such as an NHS surcharge and immigration skills charge.
