A face-saving patch on a self-inflicted wound.

That’s what the UK’s new trade deal with the EU amounts to, despite the government’s breathless attempts to paint it as a triumph.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves claims that Britain is now “in a better place on trade than any other country in the world,” but beyond the spin and political theatre, the reality is far more muted.

This agreement doesn’t usher in a new golden era of prosperity—it simply patches over some of the Brexit damage inflicted by successive UK governments.

And for ordinary people, there’s precious little to get excited about.

The government touts big wins for exporters and boasts of returning British sausages and raw burgers to EU supermarket shelves.

It celebrates easier passport checks, expanded defence cooperation, and a vague promise of better youth mobility.

But scratch the surface and a familiar picture emerges: business interests are served, while the broader public is asked to applaud quietly from the sidelines.

Let’s take fishing, for example.

The sector, symbolic of Brexit sovereignty, has once again been dealt a losing hand.

The extension of EU access to UK waters until 2038 might bring “stability” for negotiators, but it strips UK fishermen of annual bargaining power.

The Scottish Fishermen’s Federation even calls it a “horror show.”

Meanwhile, food exporters stand to benefit from reduced checks and red tape, but only under conditions.

The UK will be bound to EU food standards through “dynamic alignment” and accept European Court of Justice oversight in these areas.

This may be good for trade figures, but it raises questions about sovereignty and democratic accountability—the very issues Brexit was supposed to resolve.

Defence industries also fare well, with the UK set to benefit from access to the EU’s new €150bn SAFE fund for arms manufacturing.

This opens the door for UK defence firms to tap into a lucrative market. But unless you work in arms manufacturing or have a stake in the industry, it does little to put food on the table or lower your energy bills.

As for youth mobility, there’s promise but no delivery—yet. A proposed scheme might allow young people to work and travel more freely between the UK and EU, but the specifics are still under negotiation.

Meanwhile, the government cautiously eyes immigration figures, which means any benefit for young people could be capped, delayed, or scaled back.

And let’s not forget that all of this still leaves the UK bound to follow rules it can no longer write.

While this may be necessary for smoother trade, it exposes the hollowness of post-Brexit “independence.”

Reeves may talk about growth and opportunity, but even optimistic forecasts show only modest economic improvement—and those gains are vulnerable to external shocks, like US tariffs and ongoing inflation.

The bulk of the British public will see no transformative effect on wages, job security, public services, or housing.

For them, this deal isn’t a gateway to a brighter future.

It’s a grudging admission that the promises of Brexit have failed to materialise.

So, who really benefits?

Exporters.

Corporate interests.

Politicians needing a win.

Not the many. Just the few.

This deal isn’t a turning point. It’s damage control.

And for a country that was promised a global Britain reborn, that should be cause for concern—not celebration.