[ianch99]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

Although action against the 7 times as much steel imported from the EU may have been even more useful but was impossible due to free trade agreements as part of the EU.

The steel China exported to us was generally cheap and not of especially exceptional quality. The most direct replacements for Port Talbot's higher quality output came from the EU with a couple of specific cases mentioned.

So would it have been a good thing in your mind for us to have trade barriers with the EU to ensure that Port Talbot's output had been purchased by our manufacturers first, with EU and Chinese steel priced high by tariffs?

Seems a bit discriminatory if you think that our home grown producers being undercut by China is bad while their being undercut by EU countries is fine. Port Talbot hurts either way.

I was reading a number articles that seem to contradict your position e.g.

EU states point finger over Tata Steel and anti-dumping tariffs

Britain blocked attempts to strengthen EU trade defences against imports of cheap Chinese steel that have devastated Tata Steel’s operations in the UK, according to senior European officials.

French and Italian officials said Britain had led opposition to an overhaul of anti-dumping rules that could have helped raise retaliatory tariffs in the EU to the tough level seen in the US.

The head of the European Steel Association, which represents every steelmaker on the continent, also said Britain had thwarted attempts to shut out cheap steel from China.

“The UK is the ringleader in a blocking minority of member states that is preventing a European Commission proposal on the modernisation of Europe’s trade defence instruments,” Axel Eggert told the Financial Times

Let's agree to differ on this ...