Labour is working to ‘reset’ relations with the EU which alarms Brexiteers (Image: Getty Images)
Sir Keir Starmer has been warned the “stench of betrayal” will “hang around his neck” if he tries to reverse Brexit as polling shows the decision to leave the European Union remains one of the most important dividing lines in British politics – with half of Leave voters now planning to vote for Nigel Farage’s Reform UK.
The polling comes as Sir Keir faces pressure within Labour to forge a closer relationship between the UK and the European Union.
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg, the former Conservative Leader of the House of Commons warned him against unpicking Brexit, saying: “This opinion poll shows that Brexit is still important to voters. If Starmer tries to reverse it by stealth, he would find he loses even more votes and the stench of betrayal would hang around his neck.”
As the country nears the 10th anniversary of the vote to leave the EU, the division between Remain and Leave voters remains stark. Pollsters YouGov found that while half of Leave voters intend to vote for Reform this is the case for a mere 7% of those who backed Remain.
A paltry 8% of Leave voters would back Labour if an election was held tomorrow, while 28% of Remainers would support Sir Keir Starmer’s party.
Labour was the most popular choice among Remain voters, ahead of the Liberal Democrats (21%), the Greens (19%) and the Conservatives (15%).
Kemi Badenoch’s Tories were the second most popular choice after Reform for Brexiteers (26%). Conservative strategists will be heartened they were the only party to command double-digit support among both Leave and Remain voters.
Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg and Nigel Farage were two of Britain’s highest profile Brexiteers (Image: Getty Images)
Veteran Brexiteer John Longworth, who co-chaired the Leave Means Leave campaign, cautioned against any push to rejoin the EU, saying: “Brexit is a once in a lifetime opportunity for Britain to thrive. The avoidance of EU costs in excess of £30billion and superior trade deals are already reaping benefits to offset the ineptitude of the current Government. Those parties saying they would rejoin the EU are the ones incapable of creating economic growth; it is the politics of desperation.
“Getting closer to Europe would drag us down.”
John Longworth argues Britain is already reaping benefits of Brexit (Image: Jonathan Buckmaster)
Reform UK deputy leader Richard Tice attacked both Labour and the Tories, saying: “Keir Starmer’s Government has effectively given up on pretending they respect the Brexit vote.”
He accused Labour of “edging Britain back under EU control with a customs deal” and proposals for a “UK-EU youth mobility scheme that weakens our borders”.
Mr Tice added: “And let’s not forget the Conservatives, who betrayed 17.4 million Brexit voters and failed to strip Brussels rules from British law. This polling proves that only Reform UK stands with patriotic Britons to fully deliver Brexit, and finally take back control of Britain’s borders and laws.”
Labour was invited to comment.
Starmer Issued Warning Over Brexit Reversal: ‘There Will Be a Stench of Betrayal’
Keir Starmer has faced renewed warnings that any attempt to reverse Brexit could trigger a fierce political backlash, as Britain’s relationship with the European Union once again moves towards the centre of the country’s political debate.
The former prime minister has spent much of his political career arguing for closer cooperation with Europe while maintaining that Britain should respect the result of the 2016 referendum. However, critics on the political right have repeatedly accused him of wanting to take Britain back towards the European Union.
That accusation has become particularly significant as Labour politicians and former Labour figures debate whether Britain should go further than the current post-Brexit settlement.
The warning is straightforward: closer cooperation with Brussels is one thing, but formally reversing Brexit would represent a much more consequential political decision.
Starmer’s approach to Brexit
Starmer’s position has evolved considerably since the Brexit referendum.
During the Brexit years, he supported remaining in the European Union and later backed a second referendum. After becoming Labour leader, however, he moved towards a position designed to reassure voters that a Labour government would not attempt to reverse Brexit.
Labour’s 2024 election platform committed the party to Britain’s continued position outside the European Union while promising to seek a closer relationship with European countries.
Since entering government, Starmer has pursued what he has described as a “reset” with the EU.
In February 2026, he defended closer relations with Europe while attacking Nigel Farage’s previous Brexit predictions. Starmer argued that claims made during the referendum campaign had not been fulfilled and said the Brexit agreement negotiated by Boris Johnson had created problems for businesses and the wider economy.
His government has subsequently sought closer cooperation with the EU on areas including trade, security and economic relations.
That has given critics an opportunity to argue that the government’s “reset” could eventually become something much larger.
Closer ties are not the same as rejoining
One of the most important distinctions in the current debate is between improving Britain’s relationship with the EU and actually reversing Brexit.
Starmer has repeatedly said that Britain will remain outside the European Union.
In April, however, he argued that the economic and security benefits of a closer relationship with Europe were too significant to ignore. His government was preparing to move towards greater alignment with European rules in selected areas.
That position has been attacked by opponents who fear that regulatory alignment could gradually reduce the practical differences between Britain and EU member states.
Farage has been among the most vocal critics.
When asked about Starmer’s European policy, the Reform UK leader described closer integration as a betrayal of the Brexit vote and argued that it represented a breach of Labour’s manifesto commitments.
But there remains a significant difference between Farage’s characterization and the government’s stated policy.
The government has not announced that Britain will rejoin the European Union.
Instead, it has argued for closer cooperation while remaining outside the bloc.
Why the language of “betrayal” matters
The word “betrayal” carries particular political weight because Brexit itself was built around a promise to respect the referendum result.
More than 17 million people voted Leave in 2016.
For many Leave supporters, Brexit was about much more than trade arrangements. It was associated with parliamentary sovereignty, immigration control and the ability of British governments to set their own laws.
That means any attempt to move significantly closer to EU structures can become politically sensitive.
Critics fear that gradual alignment could eventually create what they describe as “Brexit in name only”.
Supporters of closer European relations reject that interpretation. They argue that Britain can cooperate with the EU where doing so serves British interests without surrendering EU membership.
This distinction is now becoming central to the political debate.
Pressure is growing inside Labour
The debate has also become more complicated because some Labour politicians are openly discussing the possibility of going beyond Starmer’s previous position.
Andy Burnham, who is now prime minister, has said Britain should respect the decision made in the referendum while also arguing that the country needs a new direction after a decade of Brexit-related political conflict.
In May, Burnham said he wanted closer relations with Europe but did not want the country to become trapped in another divisive Brexit argument.
More recently, however, Burnham has left open the possibility of Labour eventually discussing a future return to the EU.
That does not amount to an immediate commitment to rejoin.
Nevertheless, it has opened a political debate that Starmer attempted to keep closed during his time as prime minister.
The contrast between the two Labour leaders illustrates how quickly the party’s approach to Europe could become an internal political issue.
The case for going further
Supporters of a closer relationship with the EU argue that Brexit created unnecessary barriers to trade and cooperation.
David Miliband, the former Labour foreign secretary, has become one of the most prominent voices calling for a much deeper change.
In September 2026, Miliband argued that Brexit had weakened Britain’s economic and political influence and called for a new institutional relationship with the EU. He also criticised Starmer for not going far enough.
Other pro-European Labour voices have made similar arguments.
Their position is that Britain’s economic interests would be better served by reducing barriers with its largest nearby trading bloc.
The debate is therefore no longer confined to whether Brexit was right or wrong.
It is increasingly about what relationship Britain should have with Europe ten years after the referendum.
The argument against reversal
Opponents of reversing Brexit take a fundamentally different view.
They argue that voters were given a referendum and that the result should be respected.
From this perspective, a government that attempted to rejoin the EU without a new referendum could face accusations of ignoring the original democratic decision.
For Reform UK and other Brexit supporters, the issue goes further.
They argue that returning to EU institutions would undermine the sovereignty that Brexit was intended to restore.
Farage has repeatedly used this argument to attack both Labour and the Conservatives.
His political message is that Britain should use the freedoms created by Brexit rather than seek to rebuild ties with the institutions it left.
That is why any movement towards rejoining would almost certainly become a major issue in national politics.
Economic arguments are driving the debate
The renewed debate is also being fuelled by economic concerns.
Supporters of closer EU ties point to trade barriers, customs procedures and difficulties experienced by some exporters since Brexit.
The government itself has acknowledged the need to improve Britain’s economic relationship with Europe.
Starmer has argued that closer cooperation can provide practical benefits without requiring Britain to return to EU membership.
Opponents respond that Britain can trade successfully with countries around the world while remaining outside European institutions.
They also argue that regulatory independence gives Britain greater freedom to establish its own economic policies.
Both sides therefore present the question as one of national economic strategy rather than simply ideology.
What would actually constitute a Brexit reversal?
There is an important difference between several possible stages of closer European integration.
The first would involve cooperation in specific sectors.
The second could involve customs arrangements or closer alignment with parts of the single market.
A much more significant step would be rejoining the European single market or customs union.
The most dramatic step would be applying to rejoin the European Union itself.
These are not interchangeable policies.
A government could pursue closer trade arrangements without seeking EU membership.
That is why claims that every new agreement with Brussels constitutes a reversal of Brexit need to be treated carefully.
At the same time, critics are entitled to ask whether a series of agreements could eventually produce a relationship substantially different from the one voters expected when they voted Leave.
That is the political argument now developing.
Farage sees an opportunity
For Nigel Farage, the debate presents an opportunity to reinforce Reform UK’s central political identity.
Brexit has been one of the defining issues of his career.
If Labour begins moving towards closer European integration, Farage can present Reform as the party committed to preserving the independence created by Brexit.
His criticism of Starmer has already focused heavily on this question.
In April, Farage described closer ties with the EU as a “betrayal” of the Brexit vote, arguing that Britain’s future should not involve tying itself increasingly closely to the bloc.
That argument is likely to remain central to Reform’s political messaging.
The warning hanging over Labour
The phrase “stench of betrayal” captures the intensity of the political reaction that could follow any explicit attempt to reverse Brexit.
But there is an important distinction between warning about such a reaction and saying that the government has already decided to reverse Brexit.
At present, the government’s stated approach has been to improve Britain’s relationship with the EU while keeping the UK outside the bloc.
That is different from rejoining.
Nevertheless, the political debate is moving.
Former Labour ministers are advocating a deeper relationship. Some current Labour figures have discussed the possibility of eventually reconsidering Britain’s position. The opposition is warning that closer integration could undermine Brexit.
The question is therefore becoming harder for Labour to avoid.
A debate that has returned
Ten years after the referendum, Brexit remains deeply embedded in Britain’s political landscape.
Starmer attempted to move the debate away from the old Leave-versus-Remain divide by promising a closer relationship with Europe without reversing Britain’s departure.
That strategy has produced agreements and greater cooperation, but it has not eliminated the political argument.
Instead, the debate has evolved.
The question is no longer simply whether Britain should leave the European Union.
It is how far Britain should go in rebuilding its relationship with the bloc—and where the line should be drawn between cooperation and reversal.
For Brexit supporters, crossing that line could represent exactly the kind of political betrayal they have warned about for years.
For those advocating closer European integration, however, the argument is that Britain’s interests may require a fundamentally different relationship after a decade outside the EU.
Whatever position voters ultimately take, the political consequences of moving from a Brexit “reset” towards an actual reversal would be far greater than those of any ordinary international agreement.
And that is why the warning hanging over Labour is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.