Starmer’s Legacy: The Great Pretender

With Sir Keir Starmer finally dispatched from Downing Street, you can almost hear the machinery of legacy management grinding into action. Allies and former colleagues speak of a profoundly decent man, overwhelmed by events – at least, until Andy Burnham shows up for a selfie. David Lammy, ever the clown, has called Starmer’s legacy “immense”. It isn’t. 

Such sycophancy can just about be forgiven from the David Lammys and Hillary Benns of this world – they are only doing their job. It is far less forgivable from the legacy media; those who fawned over Starmer’s coronation, insisting “the grown-ups were back in charge”, and who now appear equally bemused by his ousting while desperately highlighting the humanity of his resignation speech.

It is only human to recognise the strain such a job would place on any individual, particularly an unpopular one. But this is a temptation we should resist. Blubbing Prime Ministers come and go, yet Keir Starmer does not deserve the Theresa May treatment. His tears on the steps of Downing Street were tears he reserved for himself, not his victims.

For Starmer is no Theresa May. May was, for my money, a decent woman – albeit, entirely unsuited to the role of Prime Minister, and afflicted by a quite fantastic inability to understand what “leaving the European Union” actually meant. Neither is he Boris Johnson, a man whose vulnerable underbelly was exposed by his indulgence of Mr Kipling and his wife’s insatiable appetite for gold-plated curtains. He’s not even a Jeremy Corbyn. If you voted for Magic Grandpa back in 2019, you knew what you were getting – or you were a fool. Corbyn’s affection for Britain’s enemies was an open secret. The same mitigation cannot be extended to Starmer, who did his best to conceal his motives from the public. And with good reason.

If I had to sum it up in a sentence, I’d say Starmerism was an all-out assault on Britain: her history, her culture, her traditions, and above all her people, dressed up in legalese. In Keir Starmer’s flabby hands, this war was waged like a ruthless dictator: willing to prosecute, imprison, and throw anyone under the bus who threatened his own survival. It is, I believe, under this lens that every major policy decision, every misstep, every U-turn, and every outright lie, finally makes sense.

What’s curious about Starmer is that his ruthlessness was belied by his Postman Pat exterior, equally uncomfortable at the Despatch Box, before the cameras, or out in public. He effortlessly gave the impression of a man who neither got the “toolmaker” joke nor understood why he was so universally hated. So let’s help him out, shall we? And above all, let’s educate those who still insist on playing the “nice bloke, not up to the job” card. Starmer is not entitled to that defence.

The Endless Lies

Presenting himself as the antidote to Tory sleaze, the decent man who would “restore honesty and integrity to our public life”, Starmer’s penchant for deception became clear early on. Southport was “not terror-related”, despite the ricin, the Al-Qaeda training manual, the genocide fixation and the mass murder. Chicks with dicks were definitely chicks, until the Supreme Court decided they weren’t. There were no tax rises for working people – unless you counted tax rises for working people. Lady Victoria’s wardrobe couldn’t possibly be furnished on a meagre £170,000 a year, and what imbecile would suppose it could be? If he’d known then what he knows now, he’d definitely still appoint Peter Mandelson. And Morgan McSweeney’s mobile phone is away with the fairies, no matter how conveniently they showed up to steal it.

Two-Tier

Keir Starmer has repeatedly insisted he “does not recognise” two-tier treatment in Britain. But then, why would he? It’s barely perceptible, unless you pedantically go out looking for unequal responses to crime, murder, justice, policing, sentencing, employment, education, political protest, security, welfare or religion.

Free Speech

Starmer was quite right to lecture Donald Trump when he stated Britain has “a long and proud history of free speech”. He just failed to add that he had singlehandedly put an end to it. Back home, Starmer was busy fast-tracking ordinary Brits for mean tweets, selectively weaponising ‘hate speech’ laws against native concerns, banning social media for under 16s, and pushing digital ID via the backdoor. 

Muslims First

Starmer declared he was Prime Minister for everyone, and so he was. It’s just that everyone didn’t get an equal share. Sir Keir could barely manage 19 seconds to lay a wreath for the three murdered Southport girls, but he somehow found hours to stand in solidarity with Muslim communities after far lesser incidents. In the wake of the Southport massacre, he famously declared war on “far-right thuggery” (normal Brits not wanting their daughters stabbed to death), while proclaiming to Muslims: “We stand with you”. Never one to comment on Muslim crimes for fear of “prejudicing” a trial, Starmer leapt to the defence of the Muslim community when five men were attacked in Edinburgh: 

Absolutely appalling.

No one should face violence on our streets. The suspect appears to be motivated by anti-Muslim hatred. I will not tolerate this – he will face the full force of the law.

My thoughts are with those who are injured and I thank the police and the emergency…

— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) June 20, 2026

Protecting the Vulnerable 

While more than happy to posture as the champion of women and girls, in reality Starmer’s record in this department is woeful. As Director of Public Prosecutions he openly admitted “we failed victims”. It is also claimed he let over 13,000 grooming gang suspects off with nothing more than a pathetic Child Abduction Warning Notice. As if that were not enough, he shamefully blocked calls for a full national grooming gangs inquiry. It’s hard to read this as anything other than institutional cowardice, bordering on complicity.

Smash the Gangs

Starmer repeatedly promised to “smash the gangs”, get a grip on illegal immigration,  and stop the small boats for good. In reality, 2025 saw 41,472 migrants cross the English Channel – the second-highest total on record. More than 50,000 have arrived since he took office. No serious deterrent policy has emerged, no alternative to Rwanda, and no suggestion of leaving the ECHR. On the contrary, Starmer’s energy appears to have gone into managing public perception rather than actually securing Britain’s borders. Classic Starmer: all mouth and no trousers.

Anti-White, Anti-British

At its rotten core, Starmerism represented a sustained cultural and demographic assault on the British people – above all, the white working class who built the country. Under his watch, uncomfortable realities about crime, immigration, and social breakdown have been whitewashed or inverted. Native Brits were relentlessly cast as the villains in their own story: leering rapists, bigoted thugs, and toxic misogynists, while the failures of multiculturalism were blamed on “far-right” concerns rather than the policies themselves. 

Starmer himself enthusiastically pushed this narrative. He praised the Netflix drama Adolescence: a ridiculous fiction portraying the radicalisation of young white boys by online “misogyny”, while the exact opposite played out daily on the streets of Britain. Airbrushing the real patterns of violence and exploitation from the public discourse, Starmer was more than happy for schools to indoctrinate the next generation with the approved story: it’s native British boys who are the problem.

If you were to believe Starmer’s colleagues, you’d think he’d been the equal to Blair. If you were to believe his own resignation speech, you’d think he was the greatest Prime Minister since Churchill – possibly better. But his casual dishonesty and contempt for truth (not to mention the English language) is not an accurate reflection of the facts. 

Starmer’s legacy is Peter Lynch, the 61-year-old diabetic and angina suffering grandfather, jailed for two years eight months for the ‘crime’ of holding a placard and shouting at police during the Southport riots. He was found hanged in his prison cell. 

Starmer’s legacy is Henry Nowak, the much-loved first-year student whose life bled away under the noses of the authorities, because the police had been trained to see him as a threat, no matter how many times he’d been stabbed. 

Starmer’s legacy is the Southport cover-up: the predictable, preventable, and pernicious murder of innocent little white girls, because the authorities refused to “stereotype” a young black man with a knife. 

That is Starmer’s legacy. Don’t let the tears fool you. 

 

Frank Haviland is the author of Banalysis: The Lie Destroying the West and The Frank Report, which you are welcome to subscribe to.

 

If you enjoy The New Conservative and would like to support our work, please consider buying us a coffee – it would really help to keep us going. Thank you!