Starmer does not care what the British people think

Telegraph

20-05-2025

To understand Keir Starmer's real view, just rewind to the chaotic period where the members of the House of Commons, egged on by the Speaker John Bercow, were attempting to thwart the referendum result by blocking Brexit. As shadow Brexit Secretary, Starmer fought to keep alive the prospect of a second referendum because, he said, 'After all, deeply embedded in our values are internationalism, collaboration and cooperation with our European partners.'
There is no doubt that Labour's manifesto commitment not to re-enter the Single Market or the customs union was a cynical but necessary political manoeuvre that went against all his own personal beliefs and long-held views.
There has always been an argument for working more closely with our European partners since Brexit particularly in the areas of common interest such as security, just as long as it doesn't breach the principle of Brexit itself.
It has become increasingly clear recently that the remaining establishment, as typified by the Governor of the Bank of England, had become increasingly emboldened to pursue their programme of trying to reverse some of the key principles underpinning Britain's key directed freedoms. Since a return to the Single Market or the customs union would be a public and fully fledged betrayal of the referendum result, the strategy is instead to adopt a stealth approach to reintegration with the EU.
For those of us who were 'constitutional leavers' our prime objective was to ensure that the sovereignty of Parliament was restored and that no foreign court could overrule what British voters had decided at the general election. The most unacceptable betrayal would be any new role in UK law for the European Court of Justice. This is the real problem that lies behind the seemingly benign terms 'regulatory alignment' and 'dynamic alignment'. The area chosen to advance this agenda is the ostensibly innocuous area of plant and animal health, known as SPS rules. In order to make the passage of some food and animal products easier, the United Kingdom is agreeing that its rules in this area should always be in line with that of the European Union. Let's be clear what this means. From now on, the United Kingdom will be required to follow rules set by Brussels that are made without any British representation in the room. We will become rule takers, supplicants at the hands of the European Union, including ECJ legal authority. In these areas of policy we will be in a worse position than we were when we were members of the EU itself.
This will tie Britain's hands in any future trade agreements with the growing part of the global economy that is outside the EU since Britain would not be able to negotiate different terms in these areas of policy, even if it were to be a lever to greater advantage elsewhere. And let's remember that many of the EU rules are themselves backdoor protectionist measures designed to protect European (largely French) farmers from competition. It is one of the areas where President Trump was entirely correct: the EU was using non-tariff barriers such as environmental, consumer or health and safety legislation as an alternative to monetary tariffs.
SAFE (security action for Europe) is another protectionist ploy by Paris designed to force EU members of Nato to support the French defence industry by cutting out its main rivals, the United States and the UK, from European procurement. It is unsurprising given the French antipathy towards Nato since its creation. The proposals would effectively cut EU countries off from defence capabilities produced in Britain or America, a plan that could have been purposely designed to put a more permanent smile on Putin's face. The UK has been not only a European but a global leader on the Ukrainian issue and any attempt to lock the United Kingdom out of wider European security would be reprehensible. Thankfully Germany, Poland, the Nordics and Baltics and Italy can see through this pernicious French move and look likely to demand a compromise.
No matter how these issues pan out, Keir Starmer has shown his complete disrespect for what the British people want and need.