Reading Time: 10 minutes
On Monday 19 May 2025, the UK Prime Minister met with leaders of the EU institutions to discuss the “reset” in the UK-EU relationship. A previous SPICe blog discussed the build up to the summit.
In the Scottish Parliament, the Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee (CEEAC) has published two recent and related inquiry reports:
What did the UK and the EU agree?
The summit resulted in the adoption of three documents the contents of which had been negotiated by officials ahead of the leaders meeting. The three documents are:
The summit was expected to deliver the terms of an agreement on UK and EU security cooperation. These terms were set out in both the joint statement (which set out a “new Strategic Partnership” between the UK and the EU including the outline of a number of global priorities on which both sides share similar positions) and in a security and defence partnership which seeks to establish and implement:
“a comprehensive, balanced and mutually beneficial Security and Defence Partnership that will frame their cooperation across the security and defence spectrum.”
A common understanding?
From a devolved policy perspective, the most significant agreement is the Common Understanding on a renewed agenda for EU-UK cooperation. This focuses on areas such as fisheries, mobility, emissions trading and sanitary and phytosanitary measures.
As was anticipated in last week’s blog ahead of the summit, high-level commitments have been made in a number of areas, but with detail still to be negotiated and agreed:
“The European Commission and the United Kingdom explored areas with the potential to strengthen bilateral cooperation between the European Union and the United Kingdom. This Common Understanding between the European Commission and the United Kingdom sets out the conclusions of those exploratory talks. We will proceed swiftly on the undertakings set out in this document, in accordance with our respective procedures and legal frameworks. We will respect each other’s decision-making autonomy.”
The next section of the blog examines some of the areas addressed in the Common Understanding.
Fisheries
Fisheries have featured heavily in UK-EU relations since the 2016 referendum, with the sector having significant cultural importance, and localised significance, over and above its overall contribution to the UK in economic terms.
UK fishers saw Brexit as an opportunity to leave the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy, historically viewed by some as benefiting EU fishers more than those at home. In the context of UK-EU relations, fisheries policy boils down to two key arrangements:
Access to each other’s waters
Quota shares (how total allowable catches are shared)
Shared access and quota stems from international law which imposes obligations on states to cooperate in conservation and management measures to avoid the overexploitation of fish stocks. This includes migratory fish which travel across a range of international jurisdictions during their life cycles.
The Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) outcome was a compromise between the UK’s desire to take back a greater share of catches in UK waters and the EU’s desire for the status quo under the Common Fisheries Policy.
The two parties ultimately agreed upon a transitional arrangement whereby the UK share of the total allowable catch would gradually increase (with the EU returning 25% of its share) from the levels previously applied under the Common Fisheries Policy over a six-year period with reciprocal access to waters.
From 2026 onwards, catch shares in place at the end of this period would continue to apply beyond 2026 unless the parties agreed otherwise. Crucially, the TCA kept the door open to the possibility of annual negotiations with the EU on access and catch shares from 2026.
This would mean the UK would engage with the EU on an annual basis as it does with other independent coastal states such as Norway and Iceland (who also negotiate annually with the EU).
Statements from the UK-EU summit provide little detail on the outcome of the fisheries agreement. The European Commission simply states the outcome of “full reciprocal access to waters to fish until 30 June 2038”.
The UK Government’s statement says the agreement “protects Britain’s fishing access, fishing rights and fishing areas with no increase in the amount of fish EU vessels can catch in British waters, providing stability and certainty for the sector”.
This suggests that reciprocal access and catch share arrangements provided for under the TCA for 2026 will remain in place until 2038, which would remove the option of annual negotiations in favour of a multi-year agreement on access and catch shares.
The Scottish Fishermen’s Federation’s reaction to the agreement describes it as a “horror show for Scottish fishermen” further adding that “[a]ny attempt by either the UK or EU to portray the new deal as a continuation of existing arrangements would be a lie, because in fact the Trade and Co-operation Agreement paved the way for annual access negotiations from 2026.”
Specific catch shares under the TCA varies by species (as specified under Annex 35). Analysis by UK in a Changing Europe has shown that the biggest increases under the TCA are concentrated in a few large offshore fisheries like western mackerel and North Sea herring and sole.
According to this analysis, Scottish fishers targeting these species have benefited most in the UK, with a 27% increase in the volume of their UK landings and a 17% increase in value since 2019. Ports such as Peterhead and Lerwick have taken most of the additional post-Brexit catch with declines in England and Wales.
The UK Government views the sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) agreement (see section below) as a benefit for fishers which it states, “slashes costs and red tape to help exports”.
Seafood Scotland stated in written evidence to the Constitution Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee inquiry on the TCA that increases in post-Brexit paperwork and border checks have “added a considerable time and cost burden for Scottish seafood traders” and that “[a]ny UK-EU agreements to further reduce trade-related bureaucracy would be welcomed”.
A reduction in export red tape may particularly benefit smaller fishing vessels targeting non-quota shellfish species with key export markets in countries like France and Spain. However, the National Federation of Fishermen’s Organisations have expressed scepticism stating their view that it is “very unlikely that any savings from reduced export costs will be passed down to the men and women who go to sea.”
Initial reaction from the fishing industry suggests they view the overall outcome as another missed opportunity for greater control of the UK’s fisheries post-Brexit.
A sanitary and phytosanitary agreement
Sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures are designed to protect humans, animals, and plants from diseases, pests, or contaminants. Goods subject to these measures are food products, live animals, products of animal origin, animal feed as well as plants and plant products. Following EU exit, UK exporters of agri-food products to the EU must abide with the EU’s SPS rules. To ensure this is the case, agri-food exports are subject to checks at the EU border and may also require export health certificates.
The Scottish Parliament’s Constitution, Europe, External Affairs and Culture Committee (CEEAC) report: Barriers to trade in goods and opportunities to improve the UK EU trading relationship called for the UK Government to agree a veterinary agreement with the EU “to significantly reduce border checks and the administrative burden on exports of agri-foods”.
The UK Government’s agreement with the EU sets out agreement to work towards “establishing a Common Sanitary and Phytosanitary Area by way of a European Union-United Kingdom Sanitary and Phytosanitary Agreement”. The SPS agreement should result in:
“the vast majority of movements of animals, animal products, plants, and plant products between Great Britain and the European Union being undertaken without the certificates or controls that are currently required.”
An SPS agreement would involve the UK agreeing to abide by EU law and rules in all areas within the scope of the agreement. This would include in areas such as:
Sanitary,
phytosanitary,
food safety,
general consumer protection rules applicable to the production, distribution and consumption of agrifood products,
the regulation of live animals and pesticides,
the rules on organics,
marketing standards applicable to certain sectors or products.
Given the UK will be required to follow EU rules over which it would have no say in the development of, the agreement suggests the UK Government should be able to contribute during the decision-shaping process for EU legislation, but it would not have a role in the formal legislative process. An agreement would be subject to a dispute resolution mechanism with an independent arbitration panel whilst ensuring that the Court of Justice of the European Union is the ultimate authority for all questions of European Union law.
NFU Scotland welcomed the commitment to work towards an SPS agreement highlighting that it:
“is expected to significantly reduce paperwork, certification requirements and border delays for Scottish exports such as beef, lamb, dairy and allow the resumption in the trade for seed potatoes.”
In a similar vein, the British Chambers of Commerce welcomed the commitment to an SPS agreement suggesting that:
“A permanent deal to remove unnecessary checks on food and drink exports in both directions is a huge boost; it will cut costs, reduce waste and increase sales.”
One issue which is less clear from the agreement is how much an SPS agreement will cost the UK. The Common Understanding states that:
“The SPS Agreement should provide for an appropriate financial contribution from the United Kingdom to support the relevant costs associated with the European Union’s work in this policy area.”
This will form part of the negotiations which are still required to finalise an SPS agreement.
Emissions Trading Scheme
The Common Understanding proposes working towards the formal linking of the Emissions Trading Schemes (ETS) of the UK and the EU stating that:
“The agreement to link the UK ETS and EU ETS should create the conditions for goods originating in our jurisdictions to benefit from mutual exemptions from the respective European Union and United Kingdom Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanisms subject to compliance with the relevant provisions of European Union and United Kingdom legislation.”
As with the proposed SPS agreement, the ETS agreement should include a commitment that the UK should comply with relevant European Union rules underpinning the functioning of the ETS (with the UK able to contribute to the decision shaping process) and the UK should make an appropriate financial contribution to support the relevant costs associated with the European Union’s work in this policy area.
The linking of the two ETS schemes was a recommendation of CEEAC’s first TCA report in which it stated that “the failure to link the UK and EU emissions trading schemes will create additional trading costs for some Scottish businesses”.
On an ETS agreement, the UK Government said:
“Closer co-operation on emissions through linking our respective Emissions Trading Systems will improve the UK’s energy security and avoid businesses being hit by the EU’s carbon tax due to come in next year – which would have sent £800 million directly to the EU’s budget.”
Youth mobility, Erasmus+ and touring creative professionals
The issue of youth mobility was much discussed ahead of the summit. CEEAC’s second TCA related report trade in services, youth mobility, and touring artists; and opportunities to improve the UK-EU trading relationship recommended that the UK and EU should agree improved arrangements in relation to youth mobility (this was agreed by division).
The Common Understanding sets out a commitment to work towards a “balanced youth experience scheme on terms to be mutually agreed”. The scheme would cover activities including:
Work,
studies,
au-pairing,
volunteering, or
travelling.
The activities would be time limited and should involve an overall number of participants which is “acceptable to both sides”.
In addition to youth mobility arrangements, the Common Understanding also states that the two sides will work towards the UK’s accession to the Erasmus+ programme with the terms of UK participation, including the “mutually agreed financial terms” to be negotiated.
On the challenges for touring creative professionals created by EU exit, the Common Understanding makes a high level commitment that the UK and the EU:
“recognise the value of travel and cultural and artistic exchanges, including the activities of touring artists.”
As a result, both the UK and the EU have committed to “continue their efforts to support travel and cultural exchange”.
Business mobility and the Mutual Recognition of Professional Qualifications
CEEAC’s second TCA inquiry report proposed that the UK and EU should agree improved arrangements around business mobility (this was agreed by division) including for short term business visitors and the mutual recognition of professional qualifications.
The Common Understanding adopts a high-level conclusion on this providing a commitment that:
“The United Kingdom and the European Commission will set up dedicated dialogues on the implementation of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, as regards entry and temporary stay of natural persons for business purposes, including the sponsorship scheme, and the recognition of professional qualifications.”
Scottish Government reaction
At the time of writing, the Scottish Government has published no news release with its reaction to the summit’s outcomes. Ahead of the summit the Scottish Government published a news release in which it provided a reminder of the areas in which it has lobbied the UK Government in relation to the UK-EU relationship:
“The Scottish Government has previously called for the UK Government to negotiate with the EU on a number of key areas including removing barriers to food and drink exports, closer energy and climate co-operation, a youth mobility agreement, and rejoining the Erasmus+ and Creative Europe programmes.”
The Common Understanding provides the basis for agreements across several of the areas identified by the Scottish Government. This was recognised by the Deputy First Minister, Kate Forbes who tweeted:
“The deal between UK and EU unpicks a small part of the damage of Brexit, esp on agriculture, food and drink, energy and Erasmus. Important progress. It’s at the cost of fishing communities, who’ve been treated as pawns throughout Brexit negotiations since 2016.”
The Scottish Government’s disappointment with the fisheries element of the agreement was also emphasised in tweets by the First Minister and the Cabinet Secretary for the Constitution, External Affairs & Culture.
Angus Robertson wrote:
“So the UK Government has just reached a 12 year deal on the devolved issue of fishing without any recourse, involvement or approval of Scottish Government and other Devolved Administrations. It follows cancellation of last three EFRA inter ministerial meetings by UK government.”
“Scotland’s fishing industry has been undermined by the UK government – again.
Like the Tories, Labour didn’t even consult @scotgov
and treated our fishing communities as expendable.
Only independence would give us the seat at the EU table to defend Scotland’s interests.”
Conclusion
The outcome of the first UK-EU summit following EU-exit led to the publication of agreements on security and on developing the UK-EU relationship. The agreement on developing the relationship demonstrates the requirement for compromise as set out by the reciprocal access agreement on fisheries and the UK being required to adopt EU rules and make payments to the EU budget where it is looking for closer links with the EU market and participation in EU programmes.
As this blog has highlighted, the proposals for developing the relationship are by and large commitments without detail at this stage. Negotiations over the coming months will be required to fill in the specific arrangements which build upon the principles set out.
Once Agreements (such as on SPS or mobility) are finalised, it’s probable that they will require the UK Government to legislate for their implementation. In areas where this legislation includes commitments in devolved policy areas, the Scottish Parliament may be asked to give legislative consent.
The UK left the EU over five years ago; the nature of the post-Brexit UK-EU relationship is continuing to take shape. As Anton Spisak from the Centre for European Reform has highlighted this agreement isn’t so much a treaty as a political roadmap:
“Finally, this isn’t a treaty. It’s a political roadmap – a shared agenda for future talks. A step forward, yes. But not a step change in the relations. Trust is being rebuilt, but the underlying model of the post-Brexit relationship hasn’t shifted in any material way.”
Iain McIver and Damon Davies, SPICe Research