Resetting the UK’s relationship with the European Union

The Labour government has pledged to reset the UK’s relationship with the European Union. This briefing describes Labour’s positions on the reset in opposition and in government and summarises reaction and commentary on its proposals.

Labour party manifesto

The Labour party manifesto for the July 2024 general election pledged to reset the UK’s relationship with the EU and reduce barriers to trade. The manifesto said this would involve negotiating a veterinary agreement to reduce border checks on agri-foods and a mutual recognition agreement for professional qualifications to help open up markets for UK service exporters. It said Labour would also address the problems faced by touring artists, who have faced barriers to being able to tour freely in the EU since Brexit.

The Labour party adopted the proposal for a veterinary agreement, often referred to more broadly as an agreement on food and agricultural standards or a ‘sanitary and phytosanitary’ (SPS) agreement, as a way of reducing barriers to UK–EU trade and some of the contentious checks between Great Britain and Northern Ireland (which were made necessary by the Northern Ireland Protocol/Windsor Framework).

Labour also pledged to seek “an ambitious new UK-EU security pact” enabling the UK and EU to work more closely on foreign, security and defence policy. The manifesto nevertheless set out “red lines” for the incoming Labour government, reiterating that the reset would not involve a return to the EU single market, customs union, or freedom of movement.

The UK–EU reset in government

Sir Keir Starmer reiterated the goal of a reset with the EU after the Labour government took office. The Prime Minister moved responsibility for the UK–EU relationship from the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) to the Cabinet Office, with Nick Thomas-Symonds appointed Minister for EU Relations in the Cabinet Office.

The EU Relations Minister said he was seeking to establish a “structured dialogue” with the EU and has held regular meetings with European Commission Vice-President (responsible for relations with the UK) Maroš Šefčovič. The minister said at the beginning of February 2025 that there had been over 70 engagements between UK ministers and their EU counterparts since the government took office.

In October 2024, the Prime Minister met with the European Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen, and they pledged to take forward an agenda of strengthened cooperation “at pace” over the coming months. They also agreed to hold regular EU–UK summits, beginning in early 2025.

The Foreign Secretary, David Lammy, met with the then EU High Representative for foreign affairs and security policy Josep Borrell on 14 October 2024, and then attended a meeting of the EU Foreign Affairs Council (the foreign affairs ministers’ configuration of the Council of the EU). The Foreign Secretary and the High Representative agreed to advance work towards a security partnership and to establish a six-monthly ‘Foreign Policy Dialogue’. In addition, they agreed to regular UK–EU strategic consultations on Russia/Ukraine, the Indo-Pacific, the Western Balkans and hybrid threats.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves, attended a meeting of the Eurogroup of EU finance ministers (finance ministers from the eurozone) on 9 December 2024. She said that the UK wanted a “mature, business-like” relationship with the EU “built on trust, mutual respect, and pragmatism”.

Three pillars of reset

In evidence to the House of Lords European Affairs Committee on 10 December 2024, the Minister for EU Relations said he saw the reset as having three pillars:

1. This covers foreign policy and security cooperation.
2. Safety of citizens. This covers closer law enforcement cooperation in areas of serious and organised crime, such as counter-terror operations and tackling irregular migration.
3. Growth and trade. This included the manifesto commitments to negotiate an SPS agreement with the EU and improve arrangements on mutual recognition of professional qualifications and for touring artists.

The minister said an UK–EU summit in the first half of 2025 would provide “a clear milestone for delivery”. He said that the Prime Minister and Commission President had tasked him and Commission Vice President Šefčovič with having “deliverables” ready for the summit.

In January 2025, the minister said the government was also looking to link the UK and EU emission trading schemes (under which businesses need to obtain allowances for their carbon emissions, which can then be traded). The government also indicated that the UK was open to an EU suggestion that the UK join the Pan-Euro-Mediterranean Convention on rules of origin, involving the EU and other European and Mediterranean countries. He also said reset negotiations were not able to commence until after the new Commission took office in December 2024 but would now become more intense in the lead up to the UK–EU summit in 2025.

Prime Minister attends EU leaders meeting

The Prime Minister took part in an informal meeting of EU leaders in Brussels on 3 February 2025, focused on defence. At the meeting, the Prime Minister called for an “ambitious UK-EU defence and security partnership” with increased cooperation on shared threats and against cross-border crime and illegal migration. He also reportedly called for greater cooperation on military missions.

In a speech at NATO headquarters on the same day, the Prime Minister said the security pact should cover military technology, research and development, improved mobility of forces across Europe, protection of critical infrastructure and deepened defence industrial collaboration.

Following the leaders’ meeting, the government announced that the UK–EU summit would take place on 19 May 2025 in London.

EU reaction

In discussions with the UK Government since July 2024, the EU has stressed the importance of full UK implementation of existing UK–EU agreements. The EU has also reportedly indicated that agreement to UK proposals will also require the UK to agree to continued access for EU fishers to UK fishing waters at existing levels after 2026 (when a transitional period set by the Trade and Cooperation Agreement ends), and to a proposed UK–EU youth mobility agreement. The European Commission had launched the youth mobility proposal, involving time limited UK–EU mobility for 18-to-30-year-olds, in April 2024, but it had been rejected by the then Conservative government and Labour opposition.

A leaked internal EU discussion document in December 2024 indicated that discussions with the UK on strengthening the UK–EU relationship required an “early understanding” on maintaining current access to fishing waters after 2026 as well as fully implementing existing agreements. It suggested that EU member states were open to considering an SPS agreement with the UK, and linking UK and EU emission trading systems, but that both would require full UK alignment with EU rules and the jurisdiction of the Court of Justice of the EU (CJEU) in interpreting EU law. The UK would also be required to make a financial contribution.

The document indicated widespread EU support for deepening cooperation with the UK on foreign policy and security and defence, with a non-legally binding security and defence partnership an option. The EU concluded similar non-binding partnerships with Japan, South Korea and Norway in 2024. At a meeting of the Council of the EU on 17 December 2024, EU ministers indicated that they viewed close cooperation with the UK in the field of foreign and security policy as a “priority area” given the current geopolitical situation.

A report at the end of January 2025 suggested that France and other member states would block progress in the reset, including on the proposed security pact, unless this was part of a broader package of agreements meeting EU demands on fisheries and youth mobility. However, in early February the President of the European Council, Antonio Costa, rejected the suggestion that disagreement over fishing rights would block a UK–EU security pact.

Commentary

Several commentators have highlighted the new and more pressing dimension to discussions about UK–EU security cooperation following Donald Trump’s return to the US presidency and increased doubts about the US commitment to European security and to support for Ukraine. Reports and commentaries have suggested that a non-binding security and defence partnership will be an initial step, with suggestions that the UK and EU use and make more flexible existing EU mechanisms for third-party participation in EU security and defence policy.

In an interview with the BBC in January 2025, Maroš Šefčovič said a UK–EU SPS agreement would require dynamic alignment, meaning that the UK would need to keep its rules aligned with the EU, and “to upgrade them at the same time”. Commentaries have indicated that an SPS agreement addressing the UK desire to eliminate border checks would require dynamic alignment. Some reports have suggested that the UK could be prepared to accept this and broader alignment in other sectors to reduce trade barriers.

Agreements to address UK concerns on touring artists and mutual recognition of professional qualifications are seen as challenging to achieve, though some commentators have suggested that these issues could be addressed in a broader mobility agreement also covering EU objectives on youth mobility. A report in February 2025 indicated that the UK was willing to compromise on the EU proposal for a youth mobility agreement, providing there was cap on the number of people coming to the UK. The government has however continued to reiterate that it has “no plans” for such an agreement and repeatedly referred to the UK’s position of not returning to free movement.

Among opposition parties, the Conservative party has said it opposes any agreement that involves rule-taking from the EU, dynamic alignment or CJEU jurisdiction, It said a future Conservative government “will not be bound by a bad Labour deal”. The Liberal Democrats support a new UK–EU customs union and UK–EU youth mobility agreement, and have criticised the government for its negative approach on the latter.