In defence of Liam Fox and DIT (not I accept the most enticing start to a tweet) this is a success for the UK Government and not as some have said entirely down to the EU. It also contains some useful pointers for future UK trade policy 1/ (sorry @SamuelMarcLowe it's a thread)
Removing market access barriers such as this is one of the fundamental purposes of trade policy, and is typically a rather time-consuming process. The EU would have been involved as well in this case, but UK officials have also spent many hours working on it 2/
Provided that our regulatory systems are maintained after Brexit, this market access will continue. Good news. But also a warning against those who would wish to see us deregulate excessively after Brexit - this could see such access removed 3/
Free Trade Agreements are a means to removing a large number of such barriers in one go. This makes them tough to negotiate, particularly as the other country will want similar numbers of barriers removed. As the example shows they are not the only way 4/
Liam Fox has shown an awareness of the UK using different means to remove trading barriers - see for example this speech - gov.uk/government/spe…. But more frequently this is ignored in the rush to the 'glamour' of Free Trade Agreements 5/ 
You can only do so many things at once, and FTAs are resource intensive to negotiate. The Government also needs to be working across other markets - something the EU is actually quite good at. We need to replicate this 6/
Ideally we would see the Government starting to consult on what we are going to try to do with our trade policy as a whole (which barriers to prioritise) rather than saying Australia, NZ, US is the answer. In 2 years we have yet to see this. 7/
If we end up in a transition period / customs union for a substantial period of time, negotiating FTAs could actually be a distraction, particularly given the uncertainty that will make completion difficult. We need a larger vision. 8/ ends
