A bill introduced in the UK House of Commons recently proposes strategies to deal with the likely impacts of Brexit on their highly subsidised agriculture sector.

An inquiry run by the environment, food and rural affairs committee ran parallel to the Bill, and focused on several key areas, including future trade deals.

The inquiry was scathing in its comments about a number of aspects of the proposed legislation.

It called for the government to explain why there had been no opportunity for the legislation to be considered before it was introduced, and argued the government should ensure there are sufficient opportunities for parliamentary scrutiny as the new system and policies are implemented.

These are criticisms that are becoming all too familiar with legislation in Australia at state and federal levels.

The committee then goes on to address a topic I have often raised here – that of equivalence and level playing fields.

And it was certainly not mincing words.

“The government should put its money where its mouth is and accept an amendment to the Agriculture Bill stipulating that food products imported as part of any future trade deal should meet or exceed British standards relating to production, animal welfare and the environment,” it said.

I (and others) have long been critical of the extraordinarily high food safety, environmental and labour standards Australian producers are required to meet, and our costs of production are much higher than our competition because of these standards.

Yet cheap food products grown in conditions that no government in Australia would tolerate floods into the country every day.

If we want Australian produce on our shelves, produce that we know is safe, nutritious ethically produced, then we must ensure Australian farmers can operate on a level playing field.

This doesn’t mean that we have to default to lowest common denominator.

Rather, if the conditions that are important to us should apply across the board. If they’re not important, then the requirements should be removed for everyone.

Australia has consistently gone it alone in global trade markets, even though many competitors have not played by the rules and maintained higher trade barriers and subsidies.

Maybe these discussions will encourage our own legislators to re-evaluate the no-win positions we’ve suffered from for so many years.