I HAVE had a string of emails over the last year or so, complaining about progress in the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership negotiations.

This is a treaty that is being negotiated between the EU and the USA to reduce tariffs and make for much freer trade between us. I am in favour of free trade: it increases employment and prosperity and it makes for better international relations.

For my own part, I believe that protectionism (trade restrictions) are always a conspiracy by producer interests against the right of consumers to buy cheaper and/or better goods and services from elsewhere. Currently, about £1.5 billion in goods and services is traded between the US and Europe every day, supporting some 13 million jobs. The new treaty will increase this considerably and it is estimated that it will add some £10 billion to the annual income of the UK. We shouldn’t look a gift horse in the mouth.

Unfortunately, some people appear to want to do exactly that. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, but many of my correspondents have sent me objections that are just wrong about the facts.

The negotiations still have some way to go. To make a success of the agreement we need to reduce cost differences between implementing EU and US regulations by promoting greater compatibility while, at the same time, maintaining high standards of health, safety and environmental protection. We have to ensure that EU exporters are treated in exactly the same way as US providers and do not face any additional regulatory requirements beyond those US businesses face themselves. We must have more open and transparent public procurement rules. Why, for instance, should US rules be allowed to require that only US steel is used in certain projects?

We need to remove some of the red tape and bureaucracy at borders and cut unnecessary costs while speeding up the movement of goods. The current negotiations address these issues. This process provides an opportunity to take stock of existing rules on both sides of the Atlantic and to remove unnecessary duplication, while making sure we support a well-regulated market. This will be done without lowering environmental, labour, or consumer safety standards. One of the things correspondents complain about in particular is that the treaty will come with its own dispute resolution procedure and panels.

This is not new and not uncommon —we already have 90 such agreements in place. Another complaint is that it will force the privatisation of the NHS by requiring our health service to open up to competition from US providers. This is just plain wrong. The treaty excludes public services and publicly-funded health services are not included in any of the EU trade commitments in these negotiations. All the people who write to me didn’t just make up these false accusations.

They have deliberately been put about by the opponents of free trade who want to scaremonger, in order to derail the treaty. A huge amount of careful parliamentary scrutiny and engagement has gone into these issues: there have been four debates and four select committee inquiries.

Britain, as an island nation, has historically been the leading advocate for free trade. It is time, once more, to assume that role. It will make us wealthier and the world wealthier too. It will be an example to the rest of the world and it will promote our values of liberty and enterprise.

Follow me on twitter.com/desmondswayne or facebook.com/Desmond.SwayneMP.