No leader for 300 years has done more to undermine our interests than Starmer
For the first time in three centuries – since the Hanoverian kings made Britain serve German interests – we are ruled by a political and administrative elite that does not put this nation first.
Our other rulers, whether they were kings, aristocrats or parliamentarians, took it for granted that their duty was to Britain. They laboured long and hard for the country in which they had a stake.
But not today. Sir Keir Starmer's 'reset' is only the latest example of decisions made since 2005 that obey other priorities. The Net Zero utopia is the most dangerous. The Chagos Islands fiasco – now 'on hold' – is the most incomprehensible. The 'reset' with the European Union is merely the most predictable. Michel Barnier predicted years ago that Starmer would lead Britain back into the EU.
I was naïve about Brexit. I thought a democratic decision would be honoured in good faith. I hoped that lowered immigration would accelerate improvement in education and training for neglected British communities. But the former Labour Europe minister Denis MacShane, with whom I appeared in my first Brexit debate in Cambridge in 2016, saw more clearly: 'It doesn't matter how people vote,' he said smugly, 'the Deep State won't let it happen.' Sure enough, the Deep State – let's call it the Blob, that indistinguishable mass of politicians, officials, and lobbyists– have won a victory.
I was doubly naïve. I thought that the British electorate could not simply be told to vote again and change their mind, as happened to the Irish and the Danes. Technically that has been true. But instead, our vote is simply ignored, like the French and Dutch votes in 2005. We are not being given the opportunity of a second referendum to rejoin the EU because that would require a proper campaign examining the pros and cons, and the BBC, for example, would be required to give a voice to all sides. In Greece and Italy, governments simply disobeyed their own voters and democracy was nullified. At least they had the excuse of being intimidated by brutal threats of financial destruction. What is Sir Keir Starmer's excuse?
Can anyone suppose that his 'reset' is the outcome of a dispassionate analysis of Britain's needs, thrashed out in a hard-nosed negotiation with the EU? Or is it a desperate attempt to reach any deal to placate blinkered Remainers and allow Starmer to declare victory? It is the Chagos deal on a vast scale: we give away things of huge value, and then pay the beneficiaries to accept them. How they laugh!
This reset floats on the ocean of misinformation with which the country has been inundated since 2016, and to which even some Leave voters have surrendered in despair. On one hand, propagandists declare that British trade has taken a huge 'hit' from Brexit – a 'hit' that can be found nowhere in the statistics. Goods exports have suffered not from Brexit, but from Whitehall's own policies, which have deliberately slashed exports of oil, cars and chemicals in the name of net zero, and decimated some of our major export industries by the highest energy costs in the developed world.
On the other hand, the EU, economically stagnant, politically crippled and strategically impotent, is hailed as a miraculous cargo cult, which will shower down wealth from the skies and make us somehow more economically successful than any of its actual members. Can anyone follow the logic here?
The EU's negotiators have ensured that what Starmer has presented as his gains are far outweighed by what we lose. As with EU research funds, we will doubtless pay in more than we get out. Does anyone think that the strategic defence fund will be different? Will the EU fund frigates and submarines we need for our defence rather than tanks made in France and Germany? How many rich European kids will be subsidised by British taxpayers to take coveted university places? How much of a regulatory burden will be placed on our struggling economy for decades to come without any choice by us?
But don't worry: we might be able to use e-gates when we go on holiday, and rock stars will roam the Continent unhindered. The frivolity of this whole exercise is utterly depressing. Have we as a country ceased to be able to think seriously and make proper decisions on matters of historic importance? Are we now incapable of distinguishing sense from nonsense?
The Labour Party once contained people like Attlee, Bevin, Gaitskill, Barbara Castle and not least Peter Shore. Listen to Shore's 1975 speech at the Oxford Union on You Tube: he spoke with wit, certainly, but also with a seriousness of mind now extinct in Labour ranks.
This 'reset' is depressing enough for its superficiality. But it is not just about trivial gains and losses. Above all it displays careless indifference to fundamental British values. The greatest of these is the belief that the people, finally, decide. This has been a golden thread in our history: Magna Carta; the Glorious Revolution; the Great Reform Bill; the People's Budget; Women's Suffrage.
Part of this is myth, critics might say, but it is a healthy myth, an aspiration to democracy and a warning to politicians that they are not the masters. But this week the people did not decide. Who did? Keir Starmer. He is counting not on popular consent but on popular apathy.
In short, the significance of the 'reset' goes far beyond its details, many of which will be trivial. It is significant as one sign – not the only one, alas – that our fundamental political values are despised. So I return to my opening thought. They are being despised by a governing Blob that no longer cares much about its country. 'Lives there a man with soul so dead?' asked Robert Burns. Yes, all too many. They are a post-national, globalised, post-democratic (that follows inevitably) elite happiest behind closed doors. The EU is their Eden.
The Opposition must not only say that it will reverse every concession that damages the national interest, as Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage have rightly done. I am sure they both mean it: it is Farage's raison d'etre and Badenoch was often the only Tory minister trying to make Brexit work. But words are cheap. Badenoch is a planner, and she must explain in detail exactly how to extract us from this sorry mess and reassert popular sovereignty.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
26 minutes ago
- Yahoo
No more ‘peace dividend'
One consequence of spending more on benefits is that there is less to spend elsewhere, notably on defence. The so-called 'peace dividend' that Western governments splurged after the end of the Cold War has left us vulnerable to a resurgence of precisely the sort of international tensions we are seeing now. Money that in the past would have bolstered armed forces now goes on social programmes that political leaders are unprepared to unwind because so many voters are dependent on them. Mark Rutte, the Nato secretary general, was in London for talks with Sir Keir Starmer yesterday as part of a tour of capitals designed to get member states to commit to spending much more on defence. In a speech at the Chatham House think-tank, he called for a 'quantum leap' in collective security just to maintain deterrence. 'Our militaries need thousands more armoured vehicles and tanks, millions more artillery shells, and we must double our enabling capabilities, such as logistics, supply, transportation and medical support,' he said. At the weekend, Russia deployed an estimated 500 missiles and drones in attacks on Ukraine, partly in response to Kyiv's extraordinary coup in destroying Russian bombers based in Siberia last week. The huge amounts of ordnance involved are indicative of the scale of modern warfare. Mr Rutte wants Nato members to commit about 5 per cent of national wealth to defence, though without saying by when. Yet Sir Keir could only reaffirm his Government's ambition to increase spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP, rising to 3 per cent in the next parliament if circumstances allow. But they will do so only if he can get to grips with spending in other areas. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
'Loaded weapon': editors decry Hungary bill targeting media
The Hungarian government's decision to delay a vote on a controversial bill which penalises "foreign-funded" media and NGOs does not mean that the danger to freedom of the press is over, top editors warn. The government is still committed to a "campaign to shut down, destroy or discredit certain media outlets, NGOs or people", Peter Uj, editor-in-chief of news site 444, told AFP. Critics say the bill, which they compare to Russia's foreign agent legislation, is the latest attempt by nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orban to tighten his control over the central European country of 9.5 million people since his return to power in 2010. Tens of thousands have protested against the bill in Budapest, with another rally to take place on Tuesday. The European Commission has also called on Hungary to withdraw the draft, while representatives of more than 80 media outlets from 22 countries -- including Britain's The Guardian and France's Liberation -- have slammed it. The bill was introduced last month and a vote was scheduled for this week, but the ruling coalition last week put it off, saying that debate would continue in the autumn and that it wanted to review "substantive comments received" from "serious organisations" other than those protesting. - 'Devious' - The legislation would blacklist organisations that "threaten the sovereignty of Hungary by using foreign funding to influence public life". Any kind of support from non-Hungarian citizens, EU funds, or even advertising revenues from companies based abroad constitutes foreign funding, according to commonly accepted legal interpretations. Blacklisted groups would need permission to receive foreign funds. They would also be barred from receiving donations through a Hungarian income tax contribution scheme, an important source of revenue for non-profits. The legal changes could affect any independent Hungarian media outlets, with 444, internet TV Partizan and news site Telex explicitly targeted. Partizan editor-in-chief Marton Gulyas, 39, described the new bill as "devious". "The law would create economic tools to make it impossible for listed organisations to function," he told AFP. The online channel, which was founded in 2018 and has a staff of 70, was the top beneficiary last year of the income tax contribution scheme, receiving more than one million euros ($1.1 million) from over 35,000 supporters. Gulyas rejected the notion that Partizan is "foreign-funded", stressing that the channel had only applied for EU-based grants in the past two years. "Hungary has been a part of the European Union since 2004. There are no borders or customs, yet this money is now being treated as if there could be some kind of criminality involved," he said. - 'Will not back down' - Telex editor-in-chief Tamas Nemet, 44, said that advertising and reader support make up 92 percent of the outlet's revenue. "But the law would now make those unviable" through various legal hurdles and administrative burdens, according to Nemet. One of Hungary's most popular news sources with a staff of around 100, Telex was established in 2021, after Nemet and his colleagues resigned en masse from the country's then-top news site, over alleged political interference. "We can see quite clearly what those in power want, the weapon is loaded and on the table," he said, adding that the "truth cannot be banned". "We will not back down," he said, vowing to "overcome whatever they come up with to hinder our operations". Orban says the law is needed to fight the alleged spread of foreign interference and disinformation. Uj of 444, along with his colleagues from Telex and Partizan, described the bill as "absurd" and "a political weapon designed to keep independent media in constant fear and to take us out". He decried rules "worded in such a way they are impossible to comply with". The 53-year-old Uj and colleagues set up the news site in 2013. It employs about 35 journalists and has broken several stories, including a child abuse pardon scandal, which last year led to the resignation of then-president Katalin Novak, a key Orban ally. AFP partners with its sister site Lakmusz for fact-checking. ros/jza/gv/bc
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
CNN Correspondent Detained By LAPD, Camera Crew Arrested
CNN National Correspondent Jason Carroll, who has been reporting on the unrest in Los Angeles for the past few days, found himself a part of the story tonight when he was detained and briefly questioned by Police in Los Angeles. During a live shot, Carroll is heard telling police his name and then seen being walked away with his hands behind his back. More from Deadline Jon Stewart Weighs In On L.A. Protests, Says Trump Is Escalating To Distract From Elon Musk's Epstein Accusation: "Petty And Petulant Man-Babies" Trump Sending Marines To L.A. To Respond To ICE Protests; POTUS Also Plans To Deploy Additional 2,000 Guard Troops, Gavin Newsom Says - Update BET Awards Set To Go On Amid LA Protests Against Immigration Raids A police officer is then heard saying, 'We're letting you go. You can't come back. If you come back, you will be arrested.' Carroll is heard to say, 'Ok.' You can see the scene below. CNN later reported that, while Carroll was released, two members of his camera crew were arrested. Carroll described the scene to Laura Coates back in the studio: 'I was walking over to the officer, tried to explain who I was, who I was with. He said, I'd like you to turn around. I turned around, I put my hands behind my back. They did not put me in zip ties, but they did grab both my hands as I was escorted over to the side, they said, you are being detained.' Carroll is not the first member of the press to get caught between police and protesters. On Sunday, Lauren Tomasi, the U.S. correspondent for Australia's 9News, appeared to be shot by a rubber bullet while reporting on the immigration protests. Nick Stern, a British news photographer, reportedly needed emergency surgery over the weekend after sustaining a leg wound during the clashes. A coalition of 27 press and civil liberties advocacy groups wrote to U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem today 'to express alarm that federal officers may have violated the First Amendment rights of journalists covering recent protests and unrest related to immigration enforcement in the Los Angeles area.' The coalition, led by the Los Angeles Press Club, First Amendment Coalition and Freedom of the Press Foundation, further wrote that 'The press plays an essential role in our democracy as the public's eyes and ears. The timely reporting of breaking news is necessary to provide the public with complete information, especially about controversial events. 'A number of reports suggest that federal officers have indiscriminately used force or deployed munitions such as tear gas or pepper balls that caused significant injuries to journalists. In some cases, federal officers appear to have deliberately targeted journalists who were doing nothing more than their job covering the news.' The LA Press Club referred to at least 24 'documented' instances of journalists being targeted by law enforcement while covering the protests in Los Angeles between June 6-8, and multiple media workers report having been shot by police with less-than-lethal munitions. Those journalists included Southern California News Group's Ryanne Mena, freelance journalists Anthony Cabassa and Sean Beckner-Carmitchel, The Southlander's Ben Camacho, British photojournalist Nick Stern, and LA Taco's Lexis Olivier-Ray. City News Service contributed to this report. Best of Deadline Sean 'Diddy' Combs Sex-Trafficking Trial Updates: Cassie Ventura's Testimony, $10M Hotel Settlement, Drugs, Violence, & The Feds A Full Timeline Of Blake Lively & Justin Baldoni's 'It Ends With Us' Feud In Court, Online & In The Media Where To Watch All The 'John Wick' Movies: Streamers That Have All Four Films