Boris Johnson will boast of a victory in the post-Brexit trade and security talks, claiming to have won 28 key battles compared with Brussels’ 11 triumphs while admitting to a fisheries compromise, according to a leaked government document. The paper, drafted as part of the UK government’s attempt to sell the deal to Brexiter MPs, suggests David Frost’s negotiators got their way on 43% of the major issues, compared with 17% for the EU’s Michel Barnier, with 40% of the treaty being a balanced compromise. Questions remain over the paper, in particular over its claims to have protected British-based car manufacturers. The UK claims a victory on so-called cumulation, which sets out whether manufactured goods containing parts made outside Britain can be exported to the EU without tariffs. The paper says that the UK won on this issue as they persuaded Brussels that EU materials and processing should to be counted as British input when the completed products are exported into the European market. A product would therefore only attract tariffs, under the agreement, if more than 40% of its pre-finished value was either not of British origin or from a non-EU country such as Japan. The reality, however, as Frost admitted in a letter to the car manufacturing industry in September, is that the UK was seeking a far more ambitious agreement. The UK wanted manufacturers to be able to in effect count products from countries with which both sides have a trade deal, such as Japan and Turkey, as being British input. Frost admitted in a letter on 6 September that “the [European] commission has made clear that it will not agree third-country cumulation in any circumstances, which we regret, but obviously cannot insist upon”. Despite the doubts over some of the “wins”, the document illustrates the scope and value of the trade deal to the British government and areas where Frost’s team did achieve their negotiating goals. One of the biggest sticking points in the talks was the EU insistence that Brussels should be able to apply tariffs if the two sides diverge in terms of environmental, social and labour standards in the future. While the landing zone was a mutual compromise, it bears a closer resemblance to the UK objective than that of Brussels. The British government had merely wanted a reflection point in the future where the two sides could discuss upgrading the basic minimum below which neither could go. The UK government document states: “The UK rejected the EU’s asks for an ‘equivalence’ mechanism, and instead secured a review and rebalancing clause which allows either side to initiate a formal review of the economic parts of the deal, including the level playing field provisions, and update the balance of the agreement over time. “Any short-term rebalancing measures are strictly limited and proportionate and subject to the approval of an independent arbitration panel.” On fisheries, the issue that dogged the talks right to the end, the UK document says there was a “mutual compromise”. Frost had said that the UK should retain the right to close off access to European fleets if an annual negotiation over quotas did not result in a mutually satisfactory conclusion. Brussels was demanding greater assurances for its fishing communities. The final deal provides for a transition period of five and a half years to allow new quotas to be phased during which European fleets will retain full access to waters, including the zone six to 12 nautical miles from the British coastline, an area the UK had wanted to retain exclusively for UK flagged vessels.