Keir Starmer will drag us back to the EU however he can
'Brexit was catastrophic for the UK, for our communities and for the next generation,' wrote Keir Starmer in 2016. So unshakable was his conviction that he resigned from Jeremy Corbyn's Shadow Cabinet over it, campaigned tirelessly for a second referendum, and voted at every opportunity to thwart the Conservative government's attempts to deliver Brexit.
Now, installed in Downing Street, he is poised to ignore the will of the people and undo Brexit by stealth.
Starmer, of course, will say all the right Brexity things like 'immigration is too high', 'We won't join the Customs Union', and so on. He knows that the British people, having suffered the indignity of being dismissed as xenophobes and little Englanders for daring to vote for independence, are not easily fooled. But Starmer has never been one to let principle get in the way of power. His long game is clear: Brexit must be diluted, dismantled, and ultimately destroyed, all while keeping up a facade of pragmatism.
The EU has form when it comes to disregarding inconvenient democratic outcomes. The French and the Dutch overwhelmingly rejected the EU Constitution in 2005, only for it to be repackaged and forced through under the Lisbon Treaty. The Irish were made to vote again in 2009 after initially rejecting both the Nice and Lisbon Treaties.
In 2015, the Greeks voted by 61 per cent to reject EU-imposed austerity measures, yet the bureaucrats in Brussels crushed them into submission regardless. Imagine Tusk and Barnier's delight if, in 2026, a decade after our 'divorce', we end up renewing vows. The pattern is clear: in the eyes of the EU, democracy is only valid when it delivers the 'correct' result and with Starmer in charge, they have a willing accomplice.
Now, Starmer is cosying up to Brussels once again. As he attends the EU Council Leaders' Summit at the Palais d'Egmont—the very building where Ted Heath signed away our sovereignty in 1972 – the symbolism could not be more ominous. He speaks of 'Defence Co-operation', but we know what that really means: deeper entanglement with the EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy, a slow creep towards subjugation under Brussels' decision-making.
The damage Starmer could do is immense. Talk of a new UK-EU Security and Defence arrangement might sound innocuous, even beneficial, but it is anything but. NATO already provides the security architecture necessary to safeguard the UK and its allies. Post-Brexit, Britain has strengthened its defence partnerships with AUKUS (the nuclear submarine agreement with the US and Australia) and GCAP (the next-generation fighter jet programme with Japan and Italy). These are real, substantive alliances that reinforce British sovereignty.
By contrast, deeper integration with EU security structures would do nothing but entangle Britain in the bloc's bureaucratic and ineffectual defence mechanisms, diluting our ability to act independently.
Regulatory alignment is another looming threat. The Product Regulation and Metrology Bill, now before Parliament, will open the door to the UK once again shackling itself to EU rules on product standards, environmental policies, and consumer regulations. Rachel Reeves has already floated the idea of 'dynamic alignment', which would mean Britain slavishly following Brussels' regulations without a seat at the table. This would render Brexit meaningless, stripping us of the ability to shape our own economic destiny. Worse still, it would torpedo any prospect of a UK-US trade deal, one of the great prizes of Brexit.
The failure of the Conservatives to properly repeal EU laws and prevent backsliding has already been a missed opportunity; Starmer's government could seal Brexit's fate.
And then there is migration. Despite the Labour Party's new rhetoric on border control, history tells us where their real loyalties lie. The idea of a UK-EU 'Returns Deal' is being discussed, allowing Britain to send some asylum seekers back to Europe. But the price will be steep: an acceptance of free movement of workers, taking in an EU-imposed quota of asylum seekers, or granting Brussels further access to British fishing waters.
None of this would be acceptable to the British public. Yet, given Labour's past enthusiasm for mass migration, can anyone truly believe Starmer's tough talk will translate into action?
The reality is that while Britain has formally left the EU, we are still far from realising the full benefits of Brexit. Thousands of EU-derived regulations continue to stifle British business. The City is warning that without further deregulation, banks will relocate operations to the US. Legal migration remains at unsustainable levels. Northern Ireland is still partially within the EU's regulatory orbit, making a UK-US free trade agreement almost impossible.
The job is not finished. The foundations of Brexit have been laid, but the structure remains incomplete.
Starmer may present himself as a pragmatist, but he is an ideologue at heart. He believes in EU supremacy, in international courts overruling British sovereignty, in rule by bureaucrats rather than by the people. If the past decade has shown us anything, it is that Brexit is an ongoing battle, not a settled matter. If Starmer gets his way, the last nine years will have been for nothing. So we must beware the Brexit Reset, beware the reversal of democracy and beware the betrayal of the 17.4 million who voted to leave.
The fight for a truly sovereign Britain must continue.
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


Newsweek
an hour ago
- Newsweek
Russian War Losses Pass Grim 1-Million Milestone
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Russian casualties fighting against Ukraine have surpassed 1 million, according to Kyiv's military, as ceasefire negotiations yield little progress and Moscow ramps up its summer offensive. Why It Matters Moscow is known for what have been dubbed "meat assaults," or using waves of many soldiers—often lacking sufficient training or adequate equipment—to attack Ukrainian positions. Casualty counts, as reported by Kyiv, have typically spiked during prolonged attacks on fortified Ukrainian positions, such as on the Donetsk cities of Bakhmut and Avdiivka. What To Know Moscow has sustained 1,000,340 casualties since the Kremlin launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, Kyiv's General Staff said on Thursday. One million Russian soldiers being killed or injured is a "stunning and grisly milestone," the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) said earlier this month The figures from Ukraine's General Staff are very difficult to independently verify, but statistics published by Kyiv are frequently cited by Western officials. The British government put Russia's likely total casualty count since February 2022 at 920,000 back in April. Experts caution that enemy casualty counts published by each side during a conflict are typically inflated. Ukraine does not disclose its own casualties. "Even if you're on the ground, it's very difficult for you to count casualties," said Marina Miron, a postdoctoral researcher with the War Studies Department at King's College London. A weapon of psychological warfare for both sides, tallies of those killed or injured don't take into account the missing, Miron told Newsweek. Newsweek has reached out to the Russian Defense Ministry for comment via email. Composite image of a shrine to a fallen soldier and Russian President Vladimir Putin bowing his head in front of a wreath held by soldiers. Composite image of a shrine to a fallen soldier and Russian President Vladimir Putin bowing his head in front of a wreath held by soldiers. Photo-illustration by Newsweek/Getty Independent Russian outlet Mediazona and the BBC's Russian service, which jointly compile a list of named deceased soldiers, said a confirmed figure of 1,762 troops had been killed between May 23 and June 6, bringing the total tally of Russian fighters known to have died in the war to 111,387. The true tally will be far higher, the outlets note, as many deaths in combat are not made public. Russia controls roughly a fifth of Ukraine, and has intensified its attacks in the country's east, as well as close to the northeastern city of Sumy in recent weeks. Moscow has said its troops reached the western border of Ukraine's battered Donetsk region, and have started an "offensive" in neighboring Dnipropetrovsk. The Kremlin said on Monday it was attempting to carve out a "buffer zone." Western and Ukrainian analysts said Russia has advanced close to the village of Horikhove, roughly a mile from the Dnipropetrovsk border. Moscow has claimed to have annexed Donetsk and Luhansk—two regions collectively known as the Donbas—along with the southern Zaporizhzhia and Kherson oblasts of Ukraine. The Kremlin has controlled Crimea, the peninsula to the south of mainland Ukraine, since it seized the territory from Kyiv in 2014. Dnipropetrovsk has not been annexed by Russian decree. Andriy Kovalenko, an official with Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council, said on Monday that Russia's statements about a Dnipropetrovsk offensive were "not true." He later said on Wednesday Moscow's military had "tried to send attack aircraft" to the Dnipropetrovsk border, which he claimed were "destroyed." Advances in Donetsk, Luhansk, the northeastern Kharkiv region and elsewhere across Ukraine have come at an eye-watering cost for Russia. Moscow has seized a "paltry" 5,000 square kilometers (almost 2,000 square miles) of the country since January 2024, equivalent to about 1 percent of Ukraine, according to the CSIS think tank. Russia initially swept up 120,000 square kilometers of Ukrainian territory in the first five weeks of its invasion, the think tank said. The CSIS put the number of Russian soldiers killed in the invasion at up to 250,000, a demonstration of what it called Russian President Vladimir Putin's "blatant disregard for his soldiers." The Kremlin leader is "afraid that sooner or later someone in Russia might start asking questions like: '[In the name of what he had sacrificed a million or more people?'" said Oleksandr Merezhko, the chair of Ukraine's parliamentary Foreign Affairs Committee. "This fear is one of the reasons why he is doubling down on his aggressive war efforts," Merezhko told Newsweek. Russian fatalities in Ukraine since its tanks rolled into the country in February 2022 are 15 times higher than the losses the Soviet Union sustained in Afghanistan, and 10 times those of the brutal conflict in Chechnya, the CSIS said. "For Russia, the end justifies the means," an anonymous former Russian defense official told The Guardian newspaper in October. "Before the war, such casualties would have seemed unimaginable," they added. "Now, it appears that the generals hardly care as long as they meet Putin's demands." Kyiv said Moscow sustained more than 628,000 of the million reported casualties in the past year and a half. Throughout 2022, just over 106,000 people were killed or injured—equivalent to 340 people on average each day, the general staff said. This more than doubled in 2023 to 693 daily casualties on average, the military said. In 2024, it surged to an average of 1,177 people per day. Figures from Ukraine's authorities for the first half of 2025 put the average number of daily Russian casualties at 1,286. The number of Russian soldiers killed or wounded on the battlefield in 2025 had exceeded 200,000 by the start of June, the Ukrainian military said. U.K. intelligence assessed in mid-April Russia that had sustained roughly 138,000 casualties fighting Ukraine up until that point in 2025. On several occasions in late 2024, Ukraine said Russia had suffered more than 2,000 casualties in the space of 24 hours. At the start of that year, Moscow seized the Ukrainian stronghold of Avdiivka, then setting its sights on the Donetsk cities of Pokrovsk and Toretsk and slowing inching westward. Russia also battled a Ukrainian incursion into the Russian Kursk region from August 2024 until March 2025. What People Are Saying Regarding the difference between the BBC and Independent Russian outlet Mediazona's tally of 111,387 confirmed Russian deaths in Ukraine over the course of the war and the far higher unconfirmed figure, Emily Ferris, a senior research fellow with the Royal United Services Institute, an influential British defense think tank, told Newsweek: "Either way, it's a significant chunk of the male population. There's no denying it." What Happens Next Analysts say Russia will likely be able to continue its war effort against Ukraine, with has a much smaller pool of possible recruits, despite the purported casualty figures. The Russian government has offered attractive salaries for contract soldiers, and has two rounds of military conscription each year, said Ferris. But it will want to avoid another mobilization, which previously proved deeply unpopular, Ferris added. Moscow declared a partial mobilization of 300,000 reservists in September 2022.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Rachel Reeves fails to rule out future tax rises as economy shrinks
Rachel Reeves failed to rule out further tax rises in the autumn as new figures showed the economy shrank more than expected in April. The Chancellor has repeatedly said that the cost of Wednesday's spending review is covered by the tax rises she brought in last year, saying departments must now 'live within their means'. But economists have warned that a weakening economy and additional commitments such as reversing much of the cut to winter fuel payments mean taxes are likely to go up again in the autumn. Asked on Thursday whether she could guarantee there would be no further tax rises, Ms Reeves told LBC: 'I think it would be very risky for a Chancellor to try and write future budgets in a world as uncertain as ours.' But she again repeated her promise that she would not need to increase taxes on the same scale as last year, when she put them up by £40 billion. And she rejected the suggestion that she was a 'Klarna Chancellor' who had announced a 'buy now, pay later' spending review. She said: 'The idea that yesterday I racked up a bill that I'm going to need to pay for in the future, that's just not right.' Her comments come as the Office for National Statistics reported that the economy shrank by 0.3% in April – the biggest monthly contraction since October 2023 and worse than the 0.1% fall most economists had expected. In recent days, both Ms Reeves and Number 10 have said the economy is beginning to turn a corner, allowing them to fund the U-turn on the winter fuel allowance. But Thursday's worse-than-expected economic news will make it harder for Ms Reeves to balance her spending commitments with Labour's promises on tax and borrowing. The Chancellor acknowledged that the reduction in GDP was 'disappointing', and blamed 'uncertainty' caused by Donald Trump's announcement of sweeping tariffs at the start of April for much of the fall. But opposition parties have laid the blame squarely with the Government, with Conservative shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride accusing Ms Reeves of 'economic vandalism'. He said: 'Under Labour, we have seen taxes hiked, inflation almost double, unemployment rise, and growth fall. With more taxes coming, things will only get worse and hard-working people will pay the price.' Daisy Cooper, the Liberal Democrats' Treasury spokeswoman, said the figures should act as 'a wake-up call for the Government which has so far refused to listen to the small businesses struggling to cope with the jobs tax' and urged ministers to pursue a 'bespoke UK-EU customs union' to compensate for the impact of US tariffs. The GDP figures come a day after the Chancellor revealed her spending plans for the coming years, including a significant increase in spending on the NHS, defence and schools. The biggest winner was the NHS, which will see its budget rise by £29 billion per year in real terms, leading the Resolution Foundation's Ruth Curtice to say Britain was slowly morphing into a 'National Health State'. But that rise came at the price of real-terms cuts elsewhere, including the Home Office, the Department for Transport and the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. On Thursday, Ms Reeves rejected claims that her decision on policing, which will see forces' 'spending power' increase by 2.3% above inflation each year, would mean cuts to frontline police numbers.

Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Donald Trump to enact key parts of US-UK trade deal within days
Donald Trump is poised to sign off crucial parts of the US-UK trade deal that will deliver lower tariffs for British car exports to America Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data