It’s been just over a year since the Labour Party reclaimed power in the United Kingdom, and the political landscape is brimming with paradoxes, economic anxieties, and simmering debates about Britain’s place in the world. While Prime Minister Keir Starmer has quietly notched up some foreign policy successes, his government faces mounting domestic pressures and a persistent question: could a bold move—like offering a referendum on rejoining the European Union—reshape Labour’s fortunes and the nation’s trajectory?
According to Nation.Cymru, the UK’s economic outlook remains troubling. More than 13 months into Labour’s administration, the government is unlikely to hit its growth targets, and the so-called “black hole” in public finances has ballooned to £51 billion. Chancellor Rachel Reeves, honoring her earlier pledges, has ruled out raising Income Tax or VAT, but taxes on gambling and possibly unearned income are under consideration. Yet, for all the talk of fiscal maneuvering, many economists agree there’s a more straightforward way to boost Britain’s growth: rejoining the EU. As Nation.Cymru puts it, “all but the crackpot fringe who have an umbilical cord that stretches all the way to the studios of GB News” would endorse the economic benefits of renewed EU membership.
This view is gaining traction not just among economists, but also in public opinion. A recent poll cited by Nation.Cymru shows that only 29% of voters would back staying out of the EU if a new referendum were held now. That’s a stark contrast to the political silence surrounding Brexit, an issue that seems to haunt Labour’s leadership. The reluctance to revisit the Brexit debate is palpable, with party leaders wary of reigniting old wounds or alienating key voter blocs.
Yet some within Labour are urging a more forthright approach. Blaenau Gwent Labour MS Alun Davies has openly advocated for a new referendum. In his words, “Reform want to talk about everything except Brexit. That’s because there’s nothing to be said in its favour. Despite what Nigel Farage and the others who promoted it said before the referendum, its impact on Britain has been wholly negative.” Davies argues that “Brexit has made Britain less competitive. It’s led to more costs for business and therefore prices have risen.” He believes that Labour “shouldn’t be afraid of pointing out that it’s very much in the interests of the UK to have access to the European single market.”
Davies goes further, suggesting that Keir Starmer’s own instincts are fundamentally pro-European: “Keir Starmer is fundamentally a European. I think he understands that when all is said and done, Britain’s future is in the EU. Everything he’s done in relation to Europe has been geared to rebooting the relationship with the EU.” According to Davies, Labour should champion the cause of a new referendum, not just to avoid electoral defeat, but to stave off what he calls “the horror of austerity on steroids that a Reform government would lead to.”
Yet, paradoxically, as Brexit’s popularity wanes, Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party has surged in the polls. Nation.Cymru points out that this apparent contradiction is partly due to the dynamics of Britain’s electoral system: “while people can choose from a list of multiple parties when deciding who to vote for in a general election, the choice in a referendum is binary.” Thus, Reform’s 31% support could translate into parliamentary power under first-past-the-post rules, but would fall well short in a referendum context.
Meanwhile, Starmer has been making waves on the international stage, even if those achievements have gone largely unrecognized at home. According to The Independent, Starmer has played a significant role in rallying European support for Ukraine, particularly during a key conference call with European leaders on August 13, 2025. His efforts helped assemble a “coalition of the willing” to pledge solidarity with Ukraine and support higher European defense spending. This unity was especially notable at the so-called “half-baked Alaska summit” between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, where European leaders, including Starmer, helped ensure that “a peace on Putin’s terms was unacceptable.”
Starmer’s diplomatic agility was, in part, a product of Britain’s status outside the EU. As The Independent notes, “Precisely because Britain is not a member of the EU, Starmer was better able to overcome EU disunity by assembling his ‘coalition of the willing.’” This nimbleness allowed the UK to take the lead in supporting Ukraine, both in terms of military aid and humanitarian response—Britain has accepted 200,000 Ukrainian refugees as of August 2025. Chancellor Reeves found an “electorally painless” way of funding increased defense spending by reallocating money from foreign aid, a move that went largely unopposed by the public.
Yet, these foreign policy successes have not translated into domestic political capital. Starmer also negotiated a deal with French President Emmanuel Macron allowing the UK to return some migrants crossing the Channel in small boats. Still, the British public remains frustrated by the ongoing arrivals, and there is little patience for promises of future deterrence. As one unnamed government source told The Times, “World War Three is breaking out internationally; it’s unreasonable for people to expect Keir to be caring about potholes.” Yet, as The Independent observes, “International leadership is well and good, but unless Keir can fix the potholes and stop the boats, it counts for nothing with the voters.”
This tension between global statesmanship and local concerns is hardly new. The article draws a parallel with Tony Blair’s intervention in Kosovo in 1999, which won international acclaim but failed to boost Labour’s standing at the ballot box. The lesson seems clear: British voters may appreciate moral leadership on the world stage, but their electoral decisions are driven by more immediate, tangible issues.
So, could a referendum on rejoining the EU be the game-changer Labour needs? Advocates like Alun Davies believe it could “spike Reform’s guns” and force figures like Farage to defend the economic and social consequences of Brexit. “Nobody, including the Brexiteers, puts forward any longer the argument that Brexit is to Britain’s economic advantage. Everyone can see that hasn’t been the case,” Davies insists. The argument is that, by promising a new referendum and making the economic case for rejoining the EU, Labour could reclaim the initiative and offer voters a path to renewed prosperity.
For now, Starmer appears content to focus on pragmatic diplomacy and incremental policy shifts, hoping that quiet competence will win the day. But as both Nation.Cymru and The Independent suggest, the clock is ticking. With economic pressures mounting and political rivals circling, Labour may soon have to decide whether to confront the Brexit legacy head-on—or risk being swept aside by forces it has so far been reluctant to challenge.
The next few months could prove decisive, not just for the Labour Party, but for the future direction of the United Kingdom itself.
