A CLAUSE in the newly signed UK-US trade agreement has provoked fierce criticism after it was revealed that Washington will be granted powers to challenge Chinese investment in Britain, deepening concerns over the UK’s increasing submission to US imperial demands.
The deal, announced on Thursday following negotiations between Prime Minister Keir Starmer and US President Donald Trump, was presented as a diplomatic success.
But buried in the text is a provision committing both governments to ‘co-operate on the effective use of investment security measures’, a phrase widely understood to allow the US to intervene in decisions over Chinese acquisitions in the UK.
While ministers deny that Washington has a formal veto, government sources confirmed the US can ‘flag’ concerns, triggering reviews under the UK’s National Security and Investment Act.
A source close to the talks admitted the arrangement amounts to ‘a sort of veto’ and was ‘extremely important to the Americans’.
The clause is seen as part of the US strategy to contain China’s global economic rise, with the UK now openly enlisting in that project.
Far from protecting British sovereignty, the agreement effectively grants the US influence over domestic economic decisions without any public debate or parliamentary oversight.
Washington has also demanded that the UK provide guarantees that steel and pharmaceutical exports to the US are not sourced from China, an extension of Trump’s trade war logic now embedded in Britain’s economic policy.
Dame Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, condemned the move as capitulation. ‘Keir Starmer has already given Trump a bigger UK tariff cut than Trump has given him,’ she said.
‘Now it looks like he’s effectively handed America a veto over investment decisions in the UK. The US has told Starmer to jump, and he’s said, “how high?’’.’
Critics argue the deal exposes the UK not as a sovereign actor but as a junior partner obedient to Washington’s anti-China agenda.
40 Labour MPs warn Starmer
MORE than 40 Labour MPs have warned Prime Minister Keir Starmer that his planned disability benefit cuts are ‘impossible to support’, marking the most significant internal backlash of his premiership.
The cross-party letter, signed by MPs from both the left and right of the Labour Party, including 14 from the 2024 intake, urges the leadership to pause and rethink proposals that would tighten eligibility for Personal Independence Payments and cut support for those deemed unfit to work.
One MP called the measures ‘the biggest attack on the welfare state since George Osborne’, warning they will deepen poverty for over 700,000 families.
The signatories criticised the government’s approach as punishing the vulnerable while failing to address systemic barriers to employment.
‘Cuts don’t create jobs, they just cause more hardship,’ the letter stated.
The growing rebellion signals dissatisfaction, not only with the policies themselves, but with Starmer’s leadership style.
While previous dissent has been rare, this intervention unites backbenchers from across the party and could result in Labour’s biggest Commons revolt to date.