Richard Barfield / May 2026
Image: Shutterstock
Responding to the pummelling that Labour received from last week’s local elections, Sir Keir Starmer has said his government will be ‘defined by rebuilding our relationship with Europe, by putting Britain at the heart of Europe’. Sir Keir has promised a ‘leap forward’ at the next UK-EU summit but gave no details about what new changes this would involve in the British approach. However, by maintaining the manifesto red lines, it seems the government is likely to limit itself to small steps. But even if it maintains them, does Labour need to be so cautious?
In March, Maroš Šefčovič, the EU Trade Commissioner, publicly reminded Nick Thomas-Symonds, UK Minister for EU relations, that a Swiss-style deal is on the table for the UK – if the UK wants it. This may be a surprise as the offer went largely unreported in the UK. Similarly, most people in the UK are unaware that Switzerland has reached a new agreement with the EU. It deserves serious consideration.
The new EU-Switzerland package offers a fresh opportunity for the UK to integrate partially with the single market, while not becoming a full member. The model fits well because Switzerland’s trade pattern with the EU is very similar to the UK’s – the EU accounts for about half of its trade in goods and services.
Through the new agreements, Switzerland gains improved participation in the single market in electricity, food safety, health, and state aid rules. The EU gains removal of trade barriers, opening Swiss agriculture to EU rules, and connecting Swiss hydropower to the EU network.
The package does not replace Switzerland’s patchwork of EU agreements but extends, rationalises and modernises them. A major improvement is a new governance mechanism that dynamically aligns Swiss regulations with the EU.
A version of the Swiss option tailored for the UK, could be a politically ideal way to reshape the UK’s relationship because it would preserve the red lines (no membership of the customs union or the single market and no return to freedom of movement). It would also strengthen the EU’s own resilience through tighter ties with the UK, a major economy, a key military ally and its third largest trading partner (after the US and China).
Partial integration into the vast EU market is so valuable that it is worth paying for. Switzerland contributes to the EU budget for the simple reason that the benefits exceed the costs. The major trade-off for the UK would be the need to align domestic rules and regulations to the EU for the chosen sectors. However, as UK businesses already need to comply with EU rules to export to the EU, this is not a major new regulatory burden.
Further, the UK would not be a passive rule-taker: formal governance arrangements allow the Swiss to give input to the EU to shape regulations for the relevant sectors. Nevertheless, as a non-member, the UK would have no vote and no final say.
The main economic benefit for the UK would come from the removal of post-Brexit red tape which has been devastating for SME exporters. For example, HMRC statistics show that 39,000 SMEs that used to export solely to the EU in 2018 had stopped 2024. The main reasons were the volume of paperwork (56%), overall costs (49%) and supply chain or logistical issues (29%).
A key channel to remove trade barriers would be through mutual recognition agreements. These remove duplicate product testing and certification and make it easier and cheaper to sell goods across borders. Reduced barriers would also facilitate UK-EU cooperation on defence and the production of military equipment.
Free movement of persons underpins the internal market by making it easier to provide services and for skilled people to move to where they are needed. Switzerland has allowed free movement of persons with the EU for over 20 years. Nevertheless, the package recognises that immigration is a sensitive political issue and includes an emergency brake that the Swiss can apply in the event of serious economic or social damage.
Free movement is a red line and a political bridge too far, given the tortuous negotiations on a youth mobility scheme. On the other hand, immigration has plummeted and public opinion is now firmly in favour of rejoining the EU. In addition, contrary to the accepted narrative, there is also significant support for free movement. As a pragmatic objective, the UK could seek some form of labour mobility and visa waivers linked to recognition of professional qualifications or occupations.
The recent Swiss negotiations took around four years. However, UK-EU negotiations should be quicker, provided the UK is clear about what it wants, and the EU leadership is on side.
As part of the process, the Swiss Federal Council assessed all available options including joining the EEA or EU but concluded these were politically unattainable. In the end, Switzerland’s preferred choice was presented politically as a ‘strategic necessity’ because of current global unrest and to maintain good relations with its neighbours.
Although rejoin advocates are likely to see the Swiss route as a sub-optimal compromise, it offers a path within the government’s red lines. In addition, it would deliver a demonstrably closer relationship with the EU, move the dial on economic growth and establish a platform to go further.
