Nigel Farage has warned that Sir Keir Starmer is “rapidly” betraying Brexit. The Reform UK leader said it would be “awful” if the Prime Minister caves in to the European Union over fishing rights in order to strike a defence deal.
The arch-Brexiteer added that he believes a security agreement with Brussels could “threaten” the Nato military alliance. Asked if Sir Keir is betraying Brexit, Mr Farage said: “It feels like it’s happening quite rapidly.
“The fishing thing is a disaster, we’ve never got what we really voted for in any way at all from fishing, to give up more would be awful. There’s now talk of a defence pact which would even include intelligence sharing at a very high level and that in my view would threaten Nato and where we’re going.
The Reform UK leader gave a press conference in Dover (Image: Getty)
“So it’s almost as if the Government is trying to do two things at the same time. Number one, be big on the world stage, get on well with President Trump, but on the other reset with Brussels. And at some point, those two policies come into collision.”
It comes as the PM is seeking a Brexit “reset” with the bloc and is due to host a UK-EU summit on May 19.
There have been reports that he has made concessions on fishing quotas to allow British firms to be able to bid for the new €150 billion EU defence fund as part of his push for closer ties.
Meanwhile, he is scrambling to strike a trade deal with the US to lessen the impact of Donald Trump‘s tariffs.
Mr Farage was speaking to the Daily Express in Dover, Kent, today as he campaigned ahead of next Thursday’s local elections.
The Clacton MP rejected talk of a pact between his insurgent party and the Tories.
Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick vowed in a leaked recording to bring together a “coalition” of Reform and Conservative voters to take on Labour.
Reform has consistently been outperforming Kemi Badenoch’s party in polling in recent months.
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.
Daily Express reporter Katie Harris speaks to Nigel Farage in Dover (Image: Daily Express)
But Mr Farage insisted he was not worried about Sir Keir going through the middle because the right-wing vote is split between the two parties.
He said: “I think if you look at it we’re already well ahead of the Conservatives in Wales, in Scotland, in the Midlands, in the north of England, we’re well ahead of the Conservatives in the national opinion polls.
“I think when people realise that we are the ones to challenge the Labour Government, I think that Conservative vote will fall even further.
“Our intention isn’t to do a deal with them, we feel horrifically let down by them, particularly since the 2019 general election. We aim to replace them.”
Mr Farage predicted that there is a “35-45%” chance he will be the next prime minister.
He dismissed suggestions that a comeback by charismatic Tory former premier Boris Johnson could scupper his bid for power and admitted Reform’s biggest threat is “ourselves”.
The rebranded Brexit Party was last month at the centre of a bitter civil war over the ousting of Great Yarmouth MP Rupert Lowe.
Mr Lowe was suspended by Reform over allegations of bullying in his offices and accusations of threats of physical violence towards party chairman Zia Yusuf, which he denies.
Mr Farage said: “I don’t think Boris Johnson coming back would stop anything.
“I think the biggest threat we’ve got is ourselves. We have to be professional, organised, disciplined, get things right.
“But you know something, politics is a big game of snakes and ladders, and there are things that happen that are way beyond your control.”
Mr Farage, who went on to visit Ramsgate and Sittingbourne this afternoon, has been travelling across the country ahead of the local elections on May 1.
He said Reform “could even surprise ourselves” by how well they perform in the ballots.
Pollster and Tory peer Lord Hayward has predicted that Mr Farage’s party will win between 400 and 450 seats, meaning it could end up returning the most councillors.
Reform also has the traditionally safe Labour seat of Runcorn and Helsby in its sights with a by-election taking place on the same day following the resignation of ex-MP Mike Amesbury for punching a constituent.
The Clacton MP said: “It’s going to be fascinating, these are clearly going to be the most watched local elections for many, many years.
“They come four years on from a high point with the Conservatives who also won the Hartlepool by-election on the same day, a very unlikely seat for the Conservatives.
“I think Reform is going to do very well, we’ll be right up there competing for the top vote share. It will be difficult to beat the Conservatives because much of it is in their shire counties. We’re going to win seats, how many I don’t know.
“I think that matters, but perhaps what will matter even more is the Runcorn and Helsby by-election, Labour’s 16th safest seat in the country. I tell you what, boy, we are running them real close.
“A week to go, optimistic, not getting carried away, but we could even surprise ourselves how well we do.”
Nigel Farage Erupts at Fishing ‘Disaster’ as He Warns of a Brexit Betrayal
Nigel Farage has once again placed Britain’s fishing industry at the centre of the Brexit debate, arguing that the promises made to fishermen before the 2016 referendum have not been delivered and warning that closer cooperation with the European Union risks further weakening the independence secured by Brexit.
Fishing has long occupied a symbolic place in Farage’s political argument. Although the industry represents only a small part of the British economy, control over UK waters became one of the most visible examples of the sovereignty arguments used during the referendum campaign. For Farage and many Brexit supporters, the question was never simply about fish. It was about who should decide what happens in British waters.
That is why the continuing arrangements with the EU remain such a politically sensitive issue.
Fishing remains one of Brexit’s most disputed promises
The post-Brexit settlement did transfer a proportion of fishing opportunities from EU fleets to British vessels, but the change was gradual rather than immediate. Under the original UK-EU Trade and Cooperation Agreement, the transition was designed to run for five and a half years, with a 25 per cent transfer of the EU’s previous fishing quota in UK waters to Britain.
The agreement also preserved reciprocal access to fishing waters under a licensing system.
That arrangement became the source of renewed controversy when the UK and EU reached their 2025 agreement extending mutual access for another 12 years, through June 2038. The 25 per cent quota transfer remains unaffected by the extension.
For Farage, however, the issue is about more than percentages.
His political argument is that Brexit should have resulted in much greater British control over the country’s waters and that successive governments have failed to use Britain’s negotiating position to achieve what Leave voters were led to expect.
In this interpretation, continued European access represents a failure to convert Brexit into the decisive break that many fishermen anticipated.
Farage’s warning about a wider Brexit reset
The fishing dispute has become part of a much larger argument about Britain’s future relationship with the EU.
Farage has repeatedly opposed attempts to deepen cooperation with Brussels, particularly where he believes new agreements could create forms of regulatory alignment or reduce the practical difference between being outside and inside the European Union.
His position is especially significant because Brexit has returned to the centre of British political debate.
Recent arguments over Britain’s relationship with Europe have included questions about trade, youth mobility, food exports, defence cooperation, travel arrangements and fishing rights. Supporters of closer cooperation argue that Britain can reduce unnecessary barriers while remaining outside the EU. Critics such as Farage argue that each additional agreement risks recreating some of the restrictions or obligations that Brexit was intended to remove.
The disagreement therefore goes far beyond the fishing industry.
It is a dispute over what Brexit is supposed to mean more than a decade after the referendum campaign began.
Why fishermen remain frustrated
The political controversy is understandable when viewed from the perspective of fishing communities.
Fishing businesses operate in a sector where access to waters is only one part of the challenge. Fuel costs, labour shortages, environmental restrictions, quotas, infrastructure and access to European markets all influence whether a fishing business can remain viable.
Brexit was promoted by many Leave campaigners as an opportunity to give British fishermen greater control and economic opportunities. Yet the practical experience after Brexit has been considerably more complicated.
British fishermen gained additional quota opportunities, but they also faced new trading procedures when selling seafood into the EU. Because much of Britain’s seafood industry depends on European markets, border bureaucracy became an important concern.
The result has been an uncomfortable contradiction.
Britain can have greater national control over fishing policy while individual fishermen still struggle with the economic consequences of a more complicated trading relationship.
That distinction is important because it demonstrates why the debate cannot be reduced simply to whether Brexit succeeded or failed.
The Starmer accusation
The language surrounding the dispute has become particularly sharp because Farage has repeatedly described closer UK-EU cooperation as a betrayal of Brexit.
The 2025 agreement became an important example.
The deal extended reciprocal fishing access for 12 years while also seeking to reduce barriers affecting British exporters. The government argued that improving access to European markets could benefit British businesses, including food producers. Critics argued that the fishing arrangements surrendered an important negotiating advantage.
Farage’s criticism therefore reflects a fundamental disagreement about priorities.
His argument places sovereignty and control of British waters above the economic benefits that the government says can come from reducing trade friction.
Supporters of the government’s approach take the opposite view: Britain can remain outside the EU while cooperating with its largest neighbouring market where doing so produces practical economic benefits.
Neither position changes the underlying reality that British fishing is deeply connected to European markets.
A political symbol much larger than the industry
The importance of fishing to the Brexit debate has always exceeded its economic size.
The sector accounts for a very small share of Britain’s overall economic output, but fishing became a powerful political symbol because it offered an unusually clear example of sovereignty.
It was easy to explain the argument: British waters should contain British fish, and British politicians should decide who can catch them.
That message resonated strongly during the referendum campaign.
A decade later, however, the reality is more complicated. Britain remains an independent coastal state, but its fishing industry operates within an international trading environment. Fish caught by British vessels may be sold into European markets, while European vessels continue to have access to British waters under negotiated arrangements.
That interconnectedness means that every government faces trade-offs.
Farage’s broader Brexit challenge
For Farage and Reform UK, fishing is therefore useful as a test case for a wider political argument.
If Brexit was intended to restore national control, he can ask why European vessels still have access to British waters until 2038.
If Brexit was intended to make Britain freer to set its own policies, he can ask why politicians are discussing closer regulatory and economic cooperation with Brussels.
And if leaving the EU was supposed to create new opportunities for British industries, he can point to businesses that continue to complain about additional bureaucracy.
These questions give Reform a way to keep Brexit politically relevant.
But the counterargument is equally important. The original Brexit settlement itself created a negotiated transition in fishing, and the later agreement did not simply hand over Britain’s entire fishing resource. The existing 25 per cent quota transfer remains in place, while the government has also committed substantial funding to fishing and coastal communities.
The disagreement is therefore about whether the settlement represents an acceptable compromise or falls short of the expectations created by Brexit.
A battle over the meaning of Brexit
The argument over fishing ultimately reflects a much broader political question: what should Britain do with Brexit now?
One approach is to treat Brexit as a permanent separation from the EU and resist arrangements that could increase economic or regulatory integration.
Another is to regard Brexit as the foundation for a different relationship, one in which Britain remains outside the EU but cooperates closely where cooperation benefits British businesses and citizens.
Farage clearly belongs to the first camp.
His warnings about fishing are part of a wider attempt to prevent Brexit from becoming a settled historical event whose consequences are gradually softened through new agreements with Brussels.
For his supporters, that makes the fishing issue a question of keeping faith with the referendum.
For critics, it risks treating a complex economic and diplomatic relationship as a simple test of political loyalty.
The fishing debate is unlikely to disappear
Whatever view is taken of Farage’s argument, fishing is unlikely to disappear from Britain’s Brexit debate.
The 2038 fishing arrangement gives the issue a long political lifespan. The industry will continue to face questions about quotas, market access, coastal investment, sustainability and the balance between domestic control and international agreements.
For Reform UK, those questions offer an opportunity to argue that Brexit remains unfinished.
For governments seeking closer cooperation with European neighbours, they demonstrate why sovereignty and economic interdependence cannot always be separated neatly.
The central dispute is therefore not simply about fish.
It is about what British voters were promised, what Brexit actually delivered, and how much further Britain should move in either direction.
Farage’s warning about a “betrayal” captures one side of that argument. The continuing debate over fishing shows why the political battle over Brexit remains unresolved, even years after Britain formally left the European Union.