The UK will shortly be trying to salvage as much of its trading and regulatory relationship with Europe as it can. I’d expect to see promises like this quietly dropped.
I imagine most companies will end up setting up EU-domiciled subsidiaries to minimise barriers, but who knows ultimately!
They signalled earlier that they are not going to align themselves with EU regulatory apparatus - this was to indicate to the EU that they were not going for the 'tight integration' approach, which is important because it was assumed by many this would be the UK position.
The UK is seeking to have an independent regulatory system, obviously, this means many things vis-a-vis relationships with the EU. Many products will naturally have to comply with regulations, just as any UK company selling kit in the US or Brazil has to align their products with those regimes.
But in reality, obviously, this will evolve given any specific advantages that might present themselves.
But it's also impossible to tell what is a 'negotiating posture' vs. what is their real, intended posture, and that's very much on purpose.
My bet is that the end result will be something like NAFTA/USMCA.
In the next 12 months, the public won’t be able to believe a single word coming from government that might involve (even tangentially) trade negotiations.
It's too disturbing to contemplate what the state of the establishment, civil service, judiciary and all the other checks and balances will be at the end of five years.
Rhetoric: Noun: Verbal communication : Discourse
In politics rhetoric refers to the arguments communicated, not the views themselves. People you agree with also have rhetoric.
To the extent it has a negative connotation, that is because many arguments (even for good policies) are terrible.
But early days, let's see how that actually pans out, people saying one thing and not doing; That is `rhetoric`. Actually delivering it, a rare thing in today's times.
As for this Article 13 EU Law - not a bad one to not adopt as many a debate has extolled when the law was first mooted.
Is it just an easy low-hanging fruit to enable other less socially palatable laws to be ignored - not impossible at all, but without time we can only speculate from perspective.
[EDIT - formatting and extra S removed]