PARLIAMENTARY DEBATE
UK-France Relations - 14 January 2026 (Commons/Westminster Hall)

I beg to move,

That this House has considered UK relations with France.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Mr Dowd. I have called this debate because we are at an important and promising moment in the UK-France relationship. It has been a bumpy few years. Brexit and its fallout placed the relationship under real strain. A couple of years ago, we had a Prime Minister unclear on whether the French President was friend or foe. But those days are behind us, and six months on from an extremely successful state visit and UK-France summit, the relationship is back on track. This, therefore, is the right moment for Parliament to recognise that fact and to take stock of how the relationship can serve both countries better. This relationship matters, not just for diplomatic niceties, but because so many of this Government’s core objectives depend on it: our security, our borders, our energy system, our economic growth and our standing in the world.

The UK-France relationship is not new; it is one of the longest continuous diplomatic relationships in the world. This year marks 1,000 years since the birth of William the Conqueror, and as a Scot I note with pride that last year was the 730th anniversary of the auld alliance, which Charles de Gaulle called

“the oldest alliance in the world”,

and which I was pleased to celebrate at St Giles’ cathedral in my constituency, along with the French community in Edinburgh. Seen from that perspective, the difficulties of the past decade are no more than bumps in the road, but they were real bumps, and it matters that we now mark their passing and recognise that the relationship is moving forward with purpose.

Let me begin with defence and security. The UK and France are Europe’s two nuclear powers and its two permanent members of the UN Security Council. Together, we account for roughly 40% of Europe’s defence spending and around half the continent’s military research and technology investment. Six months on from the state visit, Lancaster House 2.0 and the entente industrielle, our defence sectors—both public and private—are more deeply intertwined than ever. Our armed forces, our intelligence services and our defence industries operate not just in parallel but in partnership.

I commend the hon. Gentleman on securing the debate. He talks about the relationship between the UK and France, and we have fought many battles against each other. However, we always remember that the last two battles we fought, we fought together, and we took on fascism across the world.

Does he agree that although the historical connection with France has perhaps always been one of friction, a symbiotic relationship has always existed and it must be built on in terms of cross-channel trade and relationships, but also immigration crossings. We have to address that issue, and the French need to resolve it in co-ordination with our national security requirements—the very thing the hon. Gentleman reminded us of in his last few words.

The hon. Gentleman is right that, strategically, our interests are aligned, even when there are key issues. I will come on to migration in just a second.

My hon. Friend is making a powerful speech that highlights his love for and expertise in this subject. One of the greatest threats to our shared security is from Russian sub-threshold activity, which could well escalate further later this year. Through the Franco-British Council—my hon. Friend and I both work with it—I have been working with the Royal United Services Institute and the Institut Montaigne on ways that the whole of both our Governments could work more effectively against that threat, including through joint National Security Council meetings—

Order. I am sorry, but this is an intervention, not a short speech.

I agree entirely with the point my hon. Friend makes. Like him, I have worked a lot with the Franco-British Council, and he is right that Europe’s strategic autonomy and ability to act collectively and in coalitions of the willing—an issue I will come to in a second—is important, given the changing geopolitical situation we clearly face.

My hon. Friend will be aware that both our nations are currently subject to disinformation online, and we also face the challenges of artificial intelligence, as well as its promise. Does he therefore agree that we need to continue the work from the Bletchley and Paris summits on AI, and to really intensify that work on technology in the future?

My right hon. Friend is absolutely right. The UK and France have substantial military technology sectors, which are critical for not only our security but the rules-based international order that the relationship between the two countries props up. When it comes to new technologies, whether it is AI or military hardware and kit, the rules-based international order needs—the liberals in the world need—the UK and France at the forefront. They need our technology and defence industries to work with our political objectives to achieve that. I think that is the point my hon. Friend the Member for Leyton and Wanstead (Mr Bailey) was about to make.

That takes me to exactly the point I was about to make in my speech. At the UK-France summit last year, the Prime Minister and President Macron reaffirmed in the Northwood declaration the declaration from 1995 about our nuclear posture and our shared nuclear weapons objectives. They said:

“we do not see situations arising in which the vital interests of either France or the United Kingdom could be threatened without the vital interests of the other also being threatened.”

There are not many countries in the world that we could say that so baldly and so clearly about. In other words, we are saying that British security is French security, and French security is British security. Despite all the bumps in the road, that strategic truth endures.

My constituency was home to the Free French forces during the second world war, and that is representative of the kind of security relationship our countries have had in the past. May I urge the Government, through the hon. Gentleman, and in the spirit of strategic futures, to get back round the table and to ensure that we have a safe and secure SAFE—Security Action for Europe—deal to allow the UK to take part in common European defence?

I thank the hon. Gentleman for sharing the history of his constituency on this important issue. SAFE is an issue that the Government and other actors in both France and the UK are working quite deeply on. Obviously, we are not in SAFE now, but we can still hope for the future.

The point about UK-France relations is not just that they are good for British or French security, but that they are good for world security, and nowhere is that clearer than in Ukraine. For example, the Storm Shadow long-range missile developed by MBDA, a joint Franco-British company, has been one of the most effective weapons supplied to Ukraine in terms of repelling Russia’s invasion.

However, this is not just about kit; it is also about political leadership. The UK and France have been at the heart of the coalition of the willing, convening 35 countries to support Ukraine’s security. That includes last week’s incredibly significant announcement that both countries are prepared to contribute ground forces in support of a future peace settlement.

At a time when we are seeing a change in strategic posture in the United States—if I can put it like that—Russian aggression in Europe, the rise of China, and crises in the middle east and South America, it is no small thing that Britain and France stand shoulder to shoulder in defence of the rules-based international order.

It is right that we recognise, despite the ups and downs in the relationship between our two countries, that the interaction of their histories and cultures has made them what they are today. However, relationships take work, so will the hon. Gentleman—I do not think he will have to declare an interest as a former distinguished diplomat in Paris—join me in paying tribute, as I hope the Minister will, to the fantastic diplomatic team that we have in our Paris embassy, and that the French Government have in their embassy here in London, both of which build and strengthen the relationship between our two countries, often behind the scenes?

I will first declare an interest: I worked at the UK embassy in Paris—the quality has improved a lot since I left. I completely agree with the right hon. Gentleman: the UK staff in France, both in Paris and in the consulates, and the French staff here in the UK, both in the embassy in London and in the consulates—including the consulate in Edinburgh, in my constituency —do fantastic work to smooth the relationship and stop crises erupting, which is so important. Of course, they also support nationals in the two countries, which is important, because tourism and business relationships, as well as political relationships, are what make this relationship so important to the country.

The hon. Gentleman mentioned tourism. Does he have any thoughts about the fantastic work that organisations such as Harrogate International Partnerships do in town twinning—a lot of which was set up off the back of world war two—and about how the educational, cultural and tourism exchange that such organisations provide can deepen the France-UK relationship?

The hon. Gentleman makes an important point. Speaking as an MP whose constituency is a tourist centre—we welcome people from across the world, and particularly from France—I know that such organisations contribute so much. Many businesses in my constituency are dependent on tourism from France but find it difficult to navigate, so organisations that have helped to mitigate bumps in the road are the backbone of the economy in places such as Edinburgh and Harrogate, and I pay tribute to them.

I thank my hon. Friend for securing the debate. On cultural relations, he may not be aware that the Festival Interceltique de Lorient, which celebrates the Celtic identity that is so strongly felt in regions of the UK and in Brittany, will this year focus on Cornish identity. Does he agree that cultural enterprises play a vital role in strengthening the close relationships between the UK and France, alongside other fundamentals, such as youth engagement, particularly through the Erasmus+ scheme?

I did not know that the Festival Interceltique de Lorient was focusing on Cornwall this year, but I have another interest to declare, because I remember going to that festival as a schoolboy; it is one of the things that inculcated in this Scottish person a love of French and Celtic culture. I absolutely know the importance of what my hon. Friend is talking about, and I thank him for raising it.

My hon. Friend is absolutely right. We have had the entente cordiale, the entente industrielle, which I referred to earlier, and the entente amicale. Bilingual schools have a huge role in allowing children not only to understand one another’s cultures, but to live both sides of their identity. In the 21st century, that is really important. The French model is something we should be looking at to allow people in wider communities in the UK to be more comfortable in their identities. I will of course cry, “Vive les écoles bilingues de Fulham!”

If there are no further inventions on those issues, let me turn to how other components of the UK-France relationship are critical to the Government’s objectives. The UK-France relationship is central not just culturally and to communities, as those interventions have suggested, or to security and geopolitics, as I outlined earlier, but to some of the Government’s domestic political priorities, including restoring control to our migration system. As we all know, illegal immigration is, by definition, a transnational problem, and thus requires a transnational solution and international co-operation. After Brexit, we left instruments such as the Dublin regulation, Schengen information system II, the Prüm treaty and others. That makes bilateral co-operation with the French so important.

When I visited northern France with the Home Affairs Committee last month, I saw the scale and seriousness of the effort underway by French police, soldiers and reservists in order to disrupt the organised crime gangs, work on maritime interceptions, work on the one in, one out pilot, reach out to migrants and change the calculus of their decision making, and create new safer routes for the future. None of those objectives can succeed without work with the French, and none would be sustained without a genuine partnership between our law enforcement agencies, border forces and political leaders.

Every Labour MP knows that we were elected on a promise to clean up the mess left on immigration. The public will not forgive us if we fail. The UK-France relationship is critical to meeting that public expectation, and woe betide us if we do not.

We have a big, thriving French community in Hampstead and Highgate who have told me they are concerned that the UK is becoming a high-risk destination for French nationals who want to live and work here because of the issues around indefinite leave to remain.

Locally, French parents are particularly concerned about having different settlement timelines to their partners because of childcare responsibilities, as it reduces their salary threshold. Does my hon. Friend think the Government should consider childcare responsibility when they reform the ILR situation for French nationals in our country?

My hon. Friend makes a really important point. The immigration system needs reform and needs to meet the public’s expectations, but that must happen in a way that works for the economy and works for families and individuals, taking cognisance of the fact that these are people’s lives. I believe that is possible within the parameters that the Home Secretary has set out, but we will need to see the detail of that policy. Like my hon. Friend, I will be watching closely to see whether it meets the objective she has just set.

Our relationship with France will be critical in managing the public’s expectations on immigration, but it goes even further than that because, beyond the domestic political imperative of getting a grip on immigration, both our countries face a bigger challenge—a dysfunctional immigration system fuels anger and distrust, and that fuels the populist right, both in Britain and in France. As two countries facing that challenge, it is important that we work together to tackle it to make sure we deal with the rise of populism.

The French relationship is also critical in some of the Government’s economic objectives, not just because France is our fifth biggest trading partner and our third largest services-sector market, or because more than £100 billion of trade is done with France every year or even because London is the fourth biggest French city—and the constituency of my hon. Friend the Member for Chelsea and Fulham (Ben Coleman) must be one of the Frenchiest—but even thinking about just our energy sector illustrates a vignette of our relationship with France.

The transition to clean energy is the defining economic public policy challenge of our age. France is one of the biggest investors in Britain’s nuclear sector. EDF Energy is central to the delivery of Hinkley Point C and Sizewell C. French engineering, finance and expertise will be indispensable to achieving this Government’s clean energy mission, so the relationship is critical, but it actually goes further than that. It is not just commercial or economic; it is radical.

Britain and France were among the first countries to industrialise. We were also major colonial powers, and our global footprint still shapes the world today with the Francophonie and the Commonwealth. That gives us a shared responsibility to lead on climate change, not only to decarbonise our economies, but to show that a prosperous net-zero society is possible.

I have something else to say about the future of the relationship. There are those of us who will want to look back nostalgically to the days that we sat together in the European Union, and many people lament the Brexit vote. Some of them are outside singing in Parliament Square, but nostalgia is a poor basis for foreign policy. Hankering for a golden past that never really existed is not the way to move forward. I would argue that that was one of the fundamental problems behind Brexit. What matters is not the architecture of the institutions but the reality of the co-operation, so I strongly welcome the Government’s progress in resetting relationships with the EU, particularly on dynamic alignment on food and energy; working together on shared objectives such as migration, Ukraine and the geopolitical challenges that we face; and building the relationships between people, which several Members have raised.

I am loath to interrupt such an excellent speech, but does the hon. Member agree that, as Members of Parliament, we all have a role to play in forging those relationships with our contemporaries in the Assemblée Nationale? I also congratulate him, in that vein, on becoming a vice-chair of the all-party parliamentary group.

The hon. Gentleman is absolutely right that relationships between political leaders are critical to developing relationships between nations, and I look forward to the work we will be doing on the APPG in that regard.

I welcome the return of the Erasmus+ and youth experience schemes. I studied in France under Erasmus and it changed my life. It has been heartbreaking that my own young constituents have not had that opportunity, and I am really pleased that the Government are now restoring that. As my hon. Friends mentioned, programmes such as the Franco-British Young Leaders—whose cohort I am part of this year—do vital work in building networks of trust across politics, business and civil society. Later this year, as a result of the state visit, we will have a huge cultural Franco-British moment when the Bayeux tapestry comes to the British Museum—it will probably be its exhibition of the decade.

This relationship is not abstract; it is human, cultural, strategic and economic all at once. It is one of the country’s closest relationships—

I will try and be sufficiently brief this time. The French have a very tight-knit strategic culture—something that we do not understand—that centres on European autonomy and being able to protect our interests as Europeans. Does my hon. Friend agree that that strategic culture is something we must relearn, post our Suez lessons, and that it should shape our outlook going forward?

Order. I remind the hon. Gentleman that it is now 4.22 pm and the Minister has to speak, so I would be grateful if he could start to wind up.

Thank you, Mr Dowd. I was on the point of winding up there, do not worry. My hon. Friend made an excellent point; he and I could spend hours discussing the Government architecture distinctions between the UK, France and, I would argue, Scotland—Scotland makes different mistakes in its Government structures in comparison with the French. The key point is that, given there are such similarities in our challenges and objectives, we can learn a lot from each other about the kind of architecture that does and does not work in each situation. The compare and contrast between cultures and structures is how we drive change forward; there are a lot of things that the UK could learn from France and vice versa.

I will sum up by saying that the UK’s relationship with France is finally back on track. We are no longer indulging in symbolism but focusing on something fundamental: that, in an unstable world, we are closer together than we are separate, and our future security, prosperity and global influence depends on that.

It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Dowd. I am grateful to my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh (Chris Murray) for securing the debate. It is a particular pleasure, as always, to hear about different constituencies’ histories; my own constituency’s history with France involves fighting a moderately successful battle to prevent France’s invasion of England—defended by the suspiciously French-named Nicola de la Haye, who was then the constable of Lincoln castle. It was a successful but bloody affair, so I am glad that my hon. Friend and so many others have carried off their commentary about their historical links with our neighbour over the channel with rather more élan than Lincoln can manage. I am grateful for the contributions of hon. Members and will endeavour to respond to the points they have raised. The Minister for Europe, my hon. Friend the Member for Cardiff South and Penarth (Stephen Doughty), would have been very glad to be here, but he is conducting a general debate about Ukraine in the main Chamber today.

We have a deep shared history with France, not just in combat but in many other things: values, trade, cultural links and partnerships on the international stage—in NATO, the G7, the United Nations and beyond. Our relationship remains vibrant, ambitious and essential. As my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh said so graciously, since this Government came to power, we have prioritised resetting and deepening relations with our European partners to deliver tangible benefits for our security, people and economy. France is central to that—even in Lincoln.

As permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and Europe’s leading defence and only nuclear powers, our countries share responsibility for international peace and security. We are at the forefront of efforts to support Ukraine and uphold European security. Our deep defence relationship under the Lancaster House treaties has enabled us to convene the coalition of the willing, sustaining long-term support for Ukraine and preparing conditions for a just and lasting peace.

Last week, my right hon. and learned Friend the Prime Minister co-chaired a meeting of the coalition of the willing with President Macron in Paris. Alongside President Zelensky, they signed a declaration of intent on deploying forces to Ukraine in the event of a peace deal, paving the way for a legal framework of British, French and partner forces to operate on Ukrainian soil to secure Ukraine’s skies and seas, and regenerate its armed forces. The Paris declaration, agreed with the US and others, sets out guarantees to be activated once the ceasefire comes into force.

My colleague the Minister for Europe is in regular contact with his counterpart: they met last month in Vienna, and in London last October ahead of the Berlin process summit. The Foreign Secretary visited her counterpart in Paris last October, and they are in regular touch. Last July’s state visit by President Macron marked the renewal of our shared bonds at every level of Government. As part of that visit, at the 37th UK-France summit President Macron and the Prime Minister strengthened our partnership with groundbreaking agreements covering migration, defence, growth and culture.

The Lancaster House 2.0 declaration will accelerate our bilateral defence and security co-operation to new levels and strengthen Europe’s contribution to NATO. We agreed to overhaul the combined joint expeditionary force to refocus it on the Euro-Atlantic area and to address evolving security threats. We reaffirmed our commitment to nuclear co-operation through the Northwood declaration, an important declaration that states that our nuclear forces are independent but can be co-ordinated. The new UK-France nuclear steering group met in December to co-ordinate work across nuclear policy, capabilities and operations. At the summit, the Prime Minster and the President also committed to strengthening co-operation on illegal migration, and tackling the criminal gangs responsible for the small boat crossings that have cost so many lives. This has been an important part of the activities of my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh in Parliament.

France is also a key part of our growth and energy security. I will not dwell on the important and vital investments that EDF has made in Sizewell C; they were covered effectively by my hon. Friend the Member for Edinburgh East and Musselburgh—he is also a former colleague in the Foreign Office. He also covered the important cultural and educational co-operation opportunities between our two countries. The exchange of the Bayeux tapestry and the Sutton Hoo treasures is a real celebration of our joint history. Our re-association to Erasmus+ in 2027 will create new opportunities for young people in exactly the way my hon. Friend described.

Across Government, we will continue to strengthen the bonds between our countries and our people in our many areas of shared ambition and co-operation. Through our co-leadership of the coalition of the willing, the UK and France will continue to provide global leadership in an era of renewed instability.

Question put and agreed to.