News

Starmer admits Brexit was a mistake – so who is to blame, and what has Britain lost?

Published

2 months ago

October 5, 2025

AFTER nearly a decade of division, economic drift and diplomatic damage, Britain’s Prime Minister has finally said what most of the country now believes – that Brexit was a mistake.

It doesn’t matter which side of politics you’re on – everyone agrees that the whole thing has been a disaster. The only point still in dispute is whose fault it is.

At the Labour Party conference in Liverpool, Sir Keir Starmer accused “self-appointed representatives of the people” of having “sold the lie of Brexit and walked away.” His words marked the first time a serving Prime Minister has openly acknowledged that leaving the European Union was not the patriotic liberation it was promised to be, but a national misstep.

The comment sent shockwaves through Westminster, reigniting one of the most bitter debates in modern British politics. Yet for millions of voters, the sense of regret has been building for years.

A gamble for party unity

***Called EU referendum in 206: David Cameron***

The story begins with David Cameron, who called the 2016 referendum not because the country demanded it, but because his own party did. Under pressure from Eurosceptic MPs and Nigel Farage’s insurgent UKIP, Cameron gambled Britain’s future on what he thought would be an easy victory.

When the country voted narrowly to leave, he resigned the next morning, leaving no plan, no leadership and no roadmap for what came next. It was, in hindsight, the original sin of the Brexit era – a national plebiscite called for internal party management, with consequences that would last for generations.

Sold a dream that could never be delivered

Millions of people voted Leave in good faith, driven by real hopes of control, fairness and national pride. Those hopes were genuine – even if the promises were not.

The Vote Leave campaign, fronted by Boris Johnson and Michael Gove, sold a dream that could never be delivered. Britain, they claimed, would “take back control,” save £350 million a week for the NHS, and strike better trade deals across the globe. None of it proved true.

Instead, Johnson’s government pursued the hardest possible form of Brexit, severing ties with the single market and customs union. The slogan “Get Brexit Done” became a substitute for economic strategy. What followed was customs red tape, labour shortages and collapsing export volumes – not liberation but isolation.

Nigel Farage, the self-styled champion of the people, helped make Brexit inevitable but bore none of the responsibility for its execution. Having declared victory, he promptly walked away, leaving others to manage the fallout he had helped create.

The missing opposition

***Jeremy Corbyn, former leader of the Labour Party***

Labour’s leadership at the time also bears blame. Jeremy Corbyn’s half-hearted Remain campaign failed to offer voters a clear alternative vision of Britain inside Europe. His refusal to take a strong stand on a second referendum allowed Leave rhetoric to dominate in former Labour heartlands, paving the way for Johnson’s landslide in 2019.

Years of damage

Nine years later, the impact is undeniable.

Economically, UK trade with the EU is down around 15 per cent compared with pre-Brexit trends. The OBR estimates the economy is 4 per cent smaller than it would have been inside the single market.
Politically, Britain’s standing in Europe has diminished. Diplomats describe a country once seen as a bridge between the US and Europe now reduced to a spectator.
Socially, Brexit has deepened divides between generations, regions and nations – fuelling support for independence movements in Scotland and rekindling border tensions in Northern Ireland.
Culturally, the end of free movement has shrunk opportunities for young people, artists and small businesses that once thrived on easy access to Europe.

What was promised as the restoration of sovereignty has often felt like the surrender of influence.

A reckoning at last

Starmer’s admission does not mean a push to rejoin the EU – at least not yet. The Prime Minister insists that his goal is to “make Brexit work,” not to reopen old wounds. But in acknowledging that Britain was misled, he has broken a political taboo that long constrained debate.

In doing so, he reflects public opinion. Polls show around 60 per cent of Britons now believe leaving the EU was a mistake. Only a third still defend it. The great national silence around Brexit is finally cracking.

Who bears the blame?

If Brexit – or at least the version of it we have lived through – was a national act of self-harm, it was one committed with many hands on the knife. Responsibility is spread across parties, personalities and decades of political cowardice.

David Cameron lit the fuse. Terrified of losing his grip on a divided Conservative Party, he promised a referendum he thought he couldn’t lose. When he did, he walked away the next morning — no plan, no roadmap, no leadership.

Boris Johnson turned that gamble into a crusade. He gave Brexit its swagger and its slogans — “Take Back Control,” “Get Brexit Done” — but not the substance to make them real. When the slogans ran out, the hard border, the trade friction and the labour shortages remained.

Nigel Farage weaponised frustration. For years he railed against Brussels, the establishment and immigration — giving voice to grievances that were real, but offering no workable plan to fix them. When the chaos began, he claimed victory and left the stage.

Jeremy Corbyn, leading Labour at the time, could have offered clarity. Instead, his half-hearted Remain campaign and later fence-sitting over a second referendum left voters uncertain what Labour stood for. The result was a landslide for Johnson and a mandate for the hardest form of Brexit imaginable.

Behind them all stood sections of the British press, which for years turned the EU into a cartoon villain — a convenient scapegoat for problems made in Westminster. The drip of distortion became the tide that carried the country out.

***Claims in The Sun that the Queen backed Brexit were later criticised by the regulator as being false***

And finally, there is the electorate itself — millions who voted in good faith, believing they were taking back control. They were promised sovereignty and prosperity; they got neither. They were sold hope — and left with red tape.

Figure	Role in the debacle	Legacy
David Cameron	Called the referendum for party reasons, then walked away	Lit the fuse
Boris Johnson	Fronted a campaign of slogans and deceit	Delivered a hard Brexit that damaged trade
Nigel Farage	Whipped up anti-EU populism	Created pressure but offered no plan
Jeremy Corbyn	Failed to lead a clear Remain alternative	Left voters confused and divided
The tabloid press	Fuelled myths about Brussels and immigration	Normalised misinformation
The electorate	Voted for a dream that never existed	Still living with the consequences

What the future holds

Britain’s road back to stability will not run through Brussels alone. For now, rejoining the EU remains politically out of reach – both because of public fatigue and the sheer complexity of reversing the 2020 withdrawal agreement. But a quiet realignment is already under way.

Starmer’s government has reopened channels with European partners on security, youth mobility, science and energy cooperation, signalling a more pragmatic tone after years of confrontation. Ministers talk of “building trust first” – widely understood in Brussels as laying the groundwork for closer ties when the political climate allows.

Yet that climate has shifted again. Farage is back from the political wilderness – and look where he is now. After reclaiming the leadership of Reform UK in mid-2024 and spending more than a year rebuilding its base, he has now driven the party past the Conservatives in the polls and forced Starmer onto the defensive.

***Reform’s Nigel Farage: Promises to “finish Brexit”***

Farage’s promise to “finish the job” of leaving the EU entirely has revived the rhetoric many thought buried. His power lies not in policy but in disruption – in turning anger into momentum and disillusionment into votes.

For all their differences, there is one point on which Keir Starmer and Nigel Farage now agree – that Brexit was not done well. The Remainer who wanted to stay and the campaigner who made leaving his life’s mission have arrived, from opposite ends of the spectrum, at the same conclusion: Britain got Brexit wrong.

The only question now is who the country will trust to put it right – the man who says he can fix it, or the one who still vows to finish it.

Business

Welsh Govt shifts stance on business rates after pressure from S4C and Herald

Published

9 hours ago

December 3, 2025

Sarah-Jane Absalom

Ministers release unexpected statement 48 hours after widespread concern highlighted in Welsh media

THE WELSH GOVERNMENT has announced a new package of tapered business rates relief for 2026-27, in a move that follows sustained pressure from Welsh media — including S4C Newyddion and The Pembrokeshire Herald — over the impact of revaluation on small businesses.

In Milford Haven, the hard-pressed pub sector is already feeling the impact: the annual bill for The Lord Kitchener is rising from £5,000 to £15,000, while rates at the Kimberley Public House have nearly doubled from £10,500 to £19,500. The Imperial Hall’s rates are increasing from £5,800 to £9,200, prompting director Lee Bridges to question why businesses “are being asked to pay more when we use less services”. In Haverfordwest, the annual rates bill for Eddie’s Nightclub is increasing from £57,000 to £61,500.

A written statement, issued suddenly on Wednesday afternoon, confirms that ministers will introduce a transitional “tapering mechanism” to soften steep increases for tourism, hospitality and small independent operators. Full details will be published with the draft Budget later this month.

The announcement comes less than two days after The Herald’s in-depth reporting brought forward direct concerns from Pembrokeshire business owners and councillors, highlighting the uncertainty facing one of Wales’ most important local industries.

Herald reporting credited by senior councillor

Pembrokeshire County Council Independent Group Leader Cllr Huw Carnhuan Murphy publicly thanked The Herald for pushing the issue into the spotlight.

In a statement shared on Wednesday, Cllr Murphy said: “Welcome news from Welsh Government. Thanks to Tom Sinclair for running this important item in the Herald in relation to the revaluation of businesses and the consequences it will have for many.

He added: “Newyddion S4C hefyd am redeg y stori pwysig yma ynghylch trethi busnes.,” which in English is “and thanks to S4C Newyddion as well for running this important story about business taxes.”

He added that the Independent Group “will always campaign to support our tourism and agriculture industry, on which so many residents rely within Pembrokeshire”.

Media spotlight increased pressure on Cardiff Bay

On Monday, ministers said business rates plans would be outlined “within the next two weeks”.
By Wednesday afternoon — following prominent coverage on S4C and continued pressure from The Herald — Welsh Government released an early written statement outlining new support.

Industry sources told The Herald they believed the level of public concern, amplified by the media, “forced the issue up the agenda much faster than expected”.

A cautious welcome for ‘better than nothing’

Cllr Murphy welcomed the partial support, though he stressed it fell short of what many businesses had hoped for.

“This isn’t the level of support many were hoping for,” he said, “but it is certainly much better than nothing.”

Draft Budget expected soon

The full tapered support scheme will be detailed in the Welsh Government draft Budget, expected within a fortnight.

Tourism and hospitality representatives have reserved final judgment until the figures are published, but many have expressed relief that some support will continue, following weeks of uncertainty.

Crime

Pembroke rape investigation dropped – one suspect now facing deportation

Published

12 hours ago

December 3, 2025

Tom Sinclair

DYFED-POWYS POLICE have closed an investigation into an alleged rape and false imprisonment in Pembroke after deciding to take no further action. One of the two men originally arrested is now in immigration detention and faces deportation.

The incident took place on Main Street over the weekend of 8–9 November 2025. Police were called at 9:45am on Sunday 9 November after reports of a woman in distress. She was taken to hospital for treatment.

Two men – aged 36 and 27 – were arrested at the scene on suspicion of rape and false imprisonment. They were subsequently released on bail while enquiries continued.

On Tuesday (2 December 2025), the force announced the criminal investigation has concluded and no charges will be brought. A police spokesperson said the decision took full account of the victim’s wishes.

Outcome for the two suspects:

The 36-year-old man has been transferred to the custody of the Home Office Immigration Enforcement team and is now detained pending deportation.
The 27-year-old man has been released with no further police action.

A Dyfed-Powys Police statement read: “This investigation was not terrorism-related, and we have no knowledge of any linked incident in Monkton. All rumours suggesting otherwise are incorrect.”

The force has also dismissed separate community speculation that the men entered the UK illegally on fraudulent passports or were due in court this week on terrorism charges.

Detectives stressed that every report of rape or serious sexual assault is treated seriously and victims are supported throughout. Anyone affected has been directed to specialist services, details of which are available on the force website.

No further police updates are expected.

News

Baby C trial: Mother breaks down in tears in the witness box

Published

13 hours ago

December 3, 2025

Sarah-Jane Absalom

She tells jury Christopher Phillips repeatedly offered to babysit her seven-week-old son alone in weeks before life-changing injuries were discovered

THE MOTHER of Baby C – the seven-week-old boy allegedly raped and seriously injured by Christopher Phillips – has begun giving evidence at Swansea Crown Court.

Speaking in a barely audible voice from the witness box and frequently breaking down in tears, the woman (who cannot be named for legal reasons) described the rapid deterioration of her infant son’s health in the weeks after she began a relationship with Phillips, whom she met on Tinder.

The couple started messaging shortly after Baby C’s birth in November 2020. The mother’s Tinder profile featured a photograph of herself cradling her newborn son.

She told the jury that all of their meetings took place at her flat in Pembrokeshire. Initially, Phillips paid no attention to the baby, but after about three weeks he began showing interest in the child.

“He sent me a message saying that if I ever needed time to myself – for shopping or anything – he would stay in the flat with the baby,” she said. She declined the offer, explaining to the court: “I didn’t know him well enough to leave my baby alone with him. You don’t leave your baby with someone you barely know.”

Days after Baby C received his first vaccinations, the child began screaming in his sleep. The mother described the cries as sounding “as if someone was snapping his bones” – a family expression she said she had grown up hearing.

A few days later she discovered extensive bruising to the baby’s bottom, a swollen testicle and blood in his nappy. Alarmed, she confided in her sister and parents. Her mother (the baby’s grandmother) immediately suspected deliberate harm, referring to “some paedo” and urging her daughter to seek urgent medical help.

The following day the mother contacted her health visitor and GP. When she told Phillips about the appointments, he became angry.

“He wasn’t shouting, but his tone was different,” she said. “He was worried it would get out in the community and that he would be seen as a suspect. He told me to ‘nip it in the bud’. He said that once it had blown over he would put his offer back on the table – the offer to look after the baby. But I still wasn’t going to accept it.”

On another occasion she walked in while Phillips was changing the baby’s nappy and noticed Sudocrem around his finger “as if it had come from a pot”. She told the jury she did not own a pot of Sudocrem.

On 19 January 2021, following further concerns, Baby C was examined at West Wales General Hospital. Doctors examined his testicle and anus. The mother said she felt “horrible” taking him in but “relieved and reassured” when they were allowed home with advice.

Back at the flat, however, Phillips complained that her refusal to let him have alone time with the baby was “annoying” him and accused her of “micro-managing”. “I was just looking after my baby,” she said.

The mother then described the events of 24 January 2021, the night she dialled 999.

Baby C began screaming in a way she had never heard before. “It wasn’t a cry of pain exactly, but I knew something was terribly wrong,” she said.

At the time the screaming started, Phillips was in the baby’s room, supposedly changing his nappy. When she tried to go in, Phillips told her to stay in the living room. Ignoring him, she entered and saw Phillips fastening the nappy. He then left the room without putting the baby’s babygro back on – something she said immediately struck her as wrong.

Baby C was taken to hospital in a critical condition with catastrophic injuries. He survived but suffered life-changing harm.

The mother denies two charges of causing or allowing a child to suffer serious physical harm and two charges of child cruelty by neglect.

Christopher Phillips (37), of Warrior Reach, Burton, Pembrokeshire, denies eleven counts of sexual penetration of a child under 13, four counts of causing grievous bodily harm with intent and one count of assault occasioning actual bodily harm, all between 20 December 2020 and 25 January 2021.

Cross-examination of the mother by the prosecution is due to begin tomorrow (Thursday, Dec 4). Closing speeches and the judge’s summing-up are expected next week, with the jury likely to retire to consider verdicts on Tuesday.