Meat processors demand UK align with EU rules to end border red tape

Meat processors have called for the UK to align immediately with EU food safety rules, warning that post-Brexit border controls are piling costs onto exporters and threatening smaller businesses.

The Association of Independent Meat Suppliers (AIMS) has published its priorities for ongoing UK–EU sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) negotiations, urging ministers to move quickly to restore what it describes as frictionless trade in food and agricultural products.

Since the UK left the EU single market, exporters have faced export health certificates, routine border checks and additional paperwork when sending goods to the bloc.

AIMS argues that these requirements duplicate controls already in place and are undermining competitiveness.

“The UK and EU operate to the same standards. The problem is not food safety. The problem is bureaucracy,” said Dr Jason Aldiss, executive director of AIMS.

“We are regulating twice for the same risk. That makes no sense for consumers, for businesses, or for regulators.”

Central to the group’s demands is immediate “dynamic alignment” with EU SPS law — meaning the UK would keep pace with EU sanitary and phytosanitary rules to remove the need for routine certification and checks.

Such a move would represent a significant political decision, as it would limit the UK’s ability to diverge from EU food safety regulations. However, AIMS insists the practical benefits outweigh the theoretical freedoms.

Its proposals include removing routine border inspections, abolishing routine veterinary export certification, recognising veterinary qualifications on both sides and easing immigration barriers for key professionals.

“It is our view that modern assurance systems, digital monitoring, and intelligence-led controls can deliver better protection at lower cost than traditional models,” Dr Aldiss said.

He described certification requirements as outdated and unnecessary where regulatory systems are equivalent.

“Certification is an artefact of mistrust. Where systems are equivalent, certificates are redundant.”

The organisation argues that delays in reaching agreement are having cumulative financial consequences for exporters and reducing consumer choice.

“Every month of delay costs British businesses money and costs consumers choice,” Dr Aldiss said.

AIMS also warned that smaller and regional processors are being disproportionately affected. With fewer administrative resources and lower volumes over which to spread compliance costs, smaller operators face greater per-unit expense under the current system.

“If we allow bureaucracy to drive consolidation, we weaken resilience and reduce food security,” he said.

While ministers have signalled a desire to improve trading arrangements with the EU, the government has previously maintained that border controls are necessary to protect biosecurity and uphold regulatory autonomy. Negotiations are continuing.

AIMS is urging both UK and EU negotiators to prioritise speed, certainty and mutual recognition of systems, rather than prolonged transitional arrangements.

“Delay is itself a policy choice, and it is the wrong one,” Dr Aldiss said.

With agri-food exports to the EU remaining a critical market for British producers, the outcome of SPS talks could shape the competitiveness and structure of the UK’s food processing sector for years to come.