Inquiry · Opened 7 March 2025
The UK-EU reset: rebuilding a strategic partnership in uncertain times
From: Foreign Affairs Committee
What this inquiry is asking
Can the UK rebuild a strategically valuable partnership with the EU after Brexit that delivers concrete benefits on security, defence, trade and prosperity—without surrendering regulatory autonomy or damaging the US relationship? The inquiry examines whether the Government's 'reset' agenda, launched at the May 2025 Lancaster House summit, is ambitious enough and properly implemented.
Status / emerging findings
- Government accepted the reset framework but committee found implementation patchy: e-gates rolled out to only 50 ports (not major holiday destinations), fishing industry disputes cost-sharing claims, touring artists still face 90-in-180-day restrictions
- Expert witnesses flagged government caution as a strategic weakness—the UK has leverage (Ukraine role, defence capabilities) but underuses it; EU Commission applies rigid precedent-based doctrine blocking bespoke deals
- Regulatory alignment with EU could unlock 1.5–2.2% GDP growth and enjoys 53–66% public support, but creates hard trade-off: full alignment rules out a comprehensive US–UK FTA, forcing a choice on food standards and agriculture
- SMEs disproportionately harmed by Brexit friction despite aggregate trade holding up; £841.7bn total trade with EU in 2025 masks structural problems for smaller firms
- Government committed £360m fishing fund but has no concrete plan to pass SPS cost savings down supply chain; annual summit mechanism in place but specifics on unresolved issues (defence industrial cooperation, youth mobility) unclear
Why it matters
The UK's approach to the EU shapes security, jobs, and trade for every British citizen; the inquiry tests whether the reset is genuine strategic repositioning or symbolic repair work that leaves real barriers (red tape, artist touring, fisheries access) unsolved.
Tone arc
Began procedurally supportive of reset goal (April–May 2025), then sharpened criticism after ministerial evidence (September 2025) revealed patchy delivery and lack of strategic clarity; committee's final report (March 2026) balanced approval of framework with frustration at modest ambitions and implementation gaps.
Themes
Key witnesses
Rt Hon Nick Thomas-Symonds MP (Cabinet Office), Stephen Doughty MP (FCDO), Professor Anand Menon (King's College London), Professor Richard Whitman (Chatham House/University of Kent), Charles Grant (Centre for European Reform), Naomi Smith (Best for Britain), Professor David Paton (Nottingham University)
Reports & Government Responses
Special Report · 21 May 2026 · HC 108
Report · 4 March 2026 · HC 857
Witness sessions
Oral evidence · 29 April 2025 · HC 857
Session 1 of 3Oral evidence · 6 May 2025 · HC 857
Session 2 of 3Oral evidence · 8 September 2025 · HC 857
Session 3 of 3Rt Hon Nick Thomas-Symonds MP; Stephen Doughty MP; Hermione Gough; +1 more
Written evidence & correspondence
Correspondence · 21 May 2026
Correspondence · 25 June 2025
Correspondence from the Minister for the Cabinet Office relating to the UK-EU reset, 15.06.25
Correspondence · 18 May 2025
Letter to the Prime Minister relating to UK-EU reset and upcoming summit, dated 13.05.25
Correspondence · 15 May 2025
Themes & actors
Topics across publication summaries
Top organisations & named entities
- Emily Thornberry·4 references
- Minister for EU Relations·2 references
- Foreign Secretary·2 references
- Foreign Affairs Committee·1 reference
- UK Government/Prime Minister·1 reference
- EU/European Commission·1 reference
- Government of Gibraltar·1 reference
- Spain·1 reference
- Ukraine·1 reference
- Russia·1 reference
Source · parliament.uk inquiry record ↗