Bridges Not Walls: What the UK-EU Summit Really Agreed—and What It Didn’t

Britain’s relationship with Europe has been trapped in the logic of yesterday. This week, at last, we broke new ground. But what exactly got done? And what is left to do?

There were three main outcomes: a Security and Defence Partnership, a “Common Understanding” outlining the next phase of negotiations, and a joint declaration on global challenges. Taken together, these mark the most significant post-Brexit breakthrough to date.

Today in the Commons, I welcomed the shift. On the Business & Trade Committee, we published our final Report last week with 21 ideas for the UK-EU Reset - and a good half of those were covered by Monday’s agreement.

But the deal still offers more ambition than answers and more bright hope than hard law. And while it points the way forward, much of the road remains unmapped.

What Has Been Agreed

1. A Security and Defence Partnership – but no binding commitments

The Partnership signed is a Memorandum of Understanding—non-binding but politically significant. It establishes a formalised mechanism for “dialogue and consultation on foreign policy, security and defence issues,” with particular reference to cooperation on “Ukraine, the Western Balkans, maritime security and development cooperation.”

It institutionalises biannual meetings between the UK Foreign Secretary and the EU High Representative. It promises working-level contacts on “peace mediation, conflict prevention, stabilisation and crisis management.”

But it does not commit the UK or EU to joint action on any specific issue. And crucially, there’s no deal yet on Britain joining EU defence initiatives, such as the €150bn SAFE programme or the European Defence Agency. On this, the text merely states that the UK and EU will “explore possible mutual involvement in respective defence initiatives in accordance with the respective legal frameworks.”

2. A Fisheries Deal – quietly long-term

One of the most tangible deals struck was on fishing access. Britain has agreed to “maintain EU access to UK waters at 2026 levels until at least 2038” —a 12-year extension. The EU reciprocates. This will be formalised through a legally binding instrument in the coming weeks.

In exchange, the UK secured continuity in energy cooperation arrangements under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) which would have otherwise lapsed in 2026. And this is huge.

3. Energy and Emissions Trading

The Common Understanding lays the ground for two new negotiations:

First, on linking the UK and EU Emissions Trading Systems, which would allow mutual exemption from the EU’s incoming Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM)—a key protection for UK steel and cement exporters.

Second, on rejoining cross-border electricity trading mechanisms, enabling the UK to plug back into the EU’s internal electricity market.

In both cases, these new arrangements will be based on UK “dynamic alignment” with EU legislation—a notable shift in principle, if not yet in law. The UK will not have a vote on the rules, but will be granted some “decision-shaping input,” likely akin to Norway’s under the EEA.

4. Mobility and Youth Exchange

The Government has now agreed to begin negotiations on a Youth Mobility Scheme and to “explore UK re-entry into Erasmus+”

The agreed language commits both parties to “work towards an agreement” on mobility and student exchange. This is a clear concession to the EU, whose member states had made mobility a priority. The exact scope, fees, and eligibility for these schemes remain unresolved. Notably, there is no reference to whether EU students could once again pay ‘home fee’ rates in UK universities.

The Government also highlighted the use of e-gates for UK passport holders at EU borders—but this is not a new agreement. Rather, it reflects discretion already allowed to individual EU states under the Schengen Border Code.

5. Trade – alignment in parts, but no wider deal

A few key areas of deeper trade cooperation are flagged:

A Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Agreement to ease agri-food trade, again based on UK alignment with EU law; plus the aforementioned agreements on electricity and carbon trading. But outside those areas, there was little to report. The summit delivered:

• No agreement on *mutual recognition of conformity assessments** for goods;

• No progress on *mutual recognition of professional qualifications**, beyond a vague “dialogue”;

• No new measures to help *British artists tour the EU**, or to ease services trade.

On customs, there’s silence. On transport, nothing. On the digital economy, not a word.

6. Migration and Law Enforcement

The parties agreed to step up “operational cooperation” on irregular migration, and to explore data exchange—including facial recognition and electronic communications metadata. But:

There is no EU commitment to a readmissions agreement, a UK priority; and there is no agreement on access to the Schengen Information System, a vital law enforcement database.

What Was Left Out

From my point of view, I think there were some issues that it would have been good if the summit documents could have flagged, including:

• The review of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement due in 2026;

• The UK’s participation in EU defence industry supply chains;

• The status of Gibraltar, still under separate negotiation;

• Parliamentary scrutiny role for the UK side.

Instead, future negotiations will proceed at the Government’s discretion, with no requirement for votes, debates, or public consultation.

So, is this a breakthrough? Yes. But is it a breakthrough enough?

The summit delivered substance in areas where alignment in hugely important areas  —climate, electricity, emissions. It offered process where agreement was harder—mobility, SPS, migration. And it avoided entirely those areas still deemed too difficult —goods, services, and sovereignty.

What we now need:

• A clear timeline** for each negotiation, with milestones and scrutiny;

• published strategy** setting out what the Government wants from the EU reset;

• And Parliamentary oversight, including Select Committee hearings and a formal vote on the eventual package.

This summit was not the end of the discussion. But it may be the end of the beginning.

It showed that partnership is possible. That pragmatism has returned. That the political frost of the last five years is, at last, beginning to melt.

But it also showed how far we still have to go. If Britain wants to thrive in a dangerous world—prosperous, secure, respected—we cannot do it alone.

The choice is not Europe or sovereignty. It is drift or direction. Isolation or influence. This time, we must choose wisely..