Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said the trade agreement between the United Kingdom and India should have been finalized 30 years ago [1].

Farage's comments highlight the ongoing political debate over the impact of Brexit on the UK's ability to secure independent trade partnerships. By linking the delay to former European Union membership, he frames the current agreement as a victory for national sovereignty over regional bureaucracy.

Farage said that the UK's previous membership in the EU prevented the country from pursuing its own independent trade agenda. He said that this restriction was the primary reason the deal with New Delhi remained unfulfilled for so long [1].

The trade agreement between London and New Delhi aims to reduce tariffs, and increase bilateral investment. While the deal is now moving forward, Farage said that the lost decades of potential growth were a direct result of EU constraints [1].

This critique aligns with the broader platform of Reform UK, which emphasizes the need for the UK to aggressively pursue global trade opportunities outside of European influence. Farage said the delay represents a missed opportunity for British businesses to integrate more deeply with the Indian market [1].

The discussion comes as the UK continues to refine its post-Brexit economic strategy, focusing on high-growth markets in Asia. Farage's remarks place the responsibility for the timing of the deal on structural political barriers rather than current diplomatic negotiations [1].

“The deal should have happened 30 years ago”

Farage's assertions serve to reinforce the narrative that EU membership was a systemic barrier to British economic interests. By claiming a 30-year delay, he is attempting to quantify the perceived cost of the UK's former alignment with the European Single Market and Common Commercial Policy, positioning the current trade deal not as a new achievement, but as a long-overdue correction.