Free Speech Starmer, Or No Trade! By Richard Miller (Londonistan)
Sir Keir Starmer, Britain's Labour Prime Minister, finds himself in a bind. Across the Atlantic, the Trump administration is dangling a tantalising trade deal—one that could shield the UK from crippling tariffs and boost its sluggish economy. But there's a catch, and it's a big one: repeal Britain's hate speech laws, which Vice President JD Vance claims stifle free expression, or the deal is off. As a Washington source bluntly told The Independent, "No free speech, no deal. It's as simple as that." For Christian conservatives, this standoff isn't just about trade—it's a clash of values, pitting Starmer's progressive vision against Trump's unapologetic defence of Western civilization. Why deal with tyrants who curb speech, they ask? Here's how the UK's censorship obsession is colliding with America's free-speech ethos and what can be done to leverage this moment for liberty.
The saga began when Starmer visited the White House last month, hoping to charm President Trump into a trade agreement focused on biotech and AI. With Trump's tariffs—10% on most UK exports, 25% on cars—looming after a 90-day suspension, the stakes are sky-high. A deal could save Britain's economy from a projected 1% GDP hit, as the Office for Budget Responsibility warns. But negotiations hit a wall when Vance, tasked with leading the talks, made free speech a non-negotiable condition. He's not subtle about it. In a fiery Oval Office exchange, Vance accused Starmer of undermining free expression, pointing to the UK's Online Safety Act and arrests over social media posts during last summer's riots. The trial of Isabel Vaughan-Spruce, prosecuted for silently praying near an abortion clinic, has become a flashpoint, with Vance slamming Britain's legal system as oppressive.
For us conservatives, Vance's stance resonates deeply. They see Starmer's Britain as a cautionary tale—a nation where hate speech laws, ostensibly protecting minorities like the LGBT+ community, have morphed into tools for censorship. The UK's Public Order Act and Communications Act have led to arrests for "offensive" tweets or silent prayers, chilling dissent. Starmer's cultural purge—removing portraits of Shakespeare and Churchill from Downing Street—only fuels the perception that he disdains Britain's heritage, making his resistance to free-speech reforms seem like stubborn allegiance to woke orthodoxy.
Why does this matter? For Christian conservatives, free speech isn't just a right—it's a Biblical mandate to proclaim truth without fear, as in 2 Timothy 4:2: "Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season." Laws that punish "hateful" speech, like those Vance targets, often ensnare Christians for expressing traditional views on marriage or gender. The Vaughan-Spruce case, where a woman faced prosecution for silent prayer, is a stark example. Vance's demand to repeal these laws aligns with a broader conservative push to protect religious liberty and resist what he calls the "fall of Western civilization." Starmer's refusal, backed by Labour's claim that free speech isn't part of the talks, feels like a rejection of both American values and Britain's own free-speech legacy.
So, what can be done to hit Starmer where it hurts and advance the cause of liberty? First, the Trump administration should hold the line. Vance's "no free speech, no deal" stance is a masterstroke, using economic leverage to force reform. Tariffs are Starmer's Achilles' heel—Britain's car industry alone faces $5 billion in annual losses without a deal. By keeping the pressure on, Trump can expose Labour's priorities: will Starmer sacrifice economic stability to preserve censorship? Publicising this dilemma, as Vance did on UnHerd, amplifies the stakes, making Labour's intransigence a political liability.
Second, conservatives in the UK and U.S. must amplify the narrative. Groups like the Free Speech Union, whose leader Lord Toby Young supports Vance, should rally public opinion, highlighting cases like Vaughan-Spruce's to show how hate speech laws target Christians and dissenters. In the U.S., conservative media and lawmakers can frame Starmer's policies as anti-American, undermining the "special relationship" Trump cherishes. Posts on social media suggest grassroots momentum, with some posts praising Trump for giving Starmer a chance to "break away" from censorship. A transatlantic campaign could shame Labour into concessions, especially as Reform UK gains ground on Starmer's right flank.
Third, target the UK's Online Safety Act, a Soros-backed darling that Vance says attacks U.S. tech giants. The act's broad powers to fine platforms for "harmful" content threaten free expression and deter American investment. Trump's team should demand its repeal alongside hate speech laws, aligning with Elon Musk's criticism of UK censorship. Starmer's partial retreat—shelving a ban on "legal but harmful" social media content—shows he's feeling the heat. Pushing harder could force a broader rollback, weakening the censorship infrastructure Soros-funded NGOs like Open Society Foundations have propped up.
Fourth, exploit Labour's economic desperation. Starmer's Britain is reeling—8,064 migrant crossings in 2025's first four months, a budget crisis, and tariff threats. Offering a limited trade deal, as Starmer proposed for June, could lure him into concessions without compromising U.S. interests. But Trump must stay firm: no deal unless hate speech laws go. This hardball tactic mirrors his first-term trade negotiations, where he extracted concessions by refusing to blink. The risk? Starmer might pivot to the EU, but Brexit's wounds make rejoining the single market a tough sell, leaving him few options.
Finally, pray for courage and wisdom. Christian conservatives see this as a spiritual battle, not just a policy fight. Starmer's alignment with globalist elites, including Soros's network, threatens the values that built Western civilisation—faith, freedom, and truth. By standing with Vance, we resist tyranny, as Proverbs 29:2 reminds us: "When the righteous thrive, the people rejoice; when the wicked rule, the people groan." Trump's leverage is a God-given opportunity to push back. Let's support leaders who deal with tyrants by exposing their weaknesses, not appeasing them.
Starmer's caught between a rock and a hard place. He can cling to censorship and face economic ruin, or embrace free speech and risk alienating his woke base. For conservatives, the choice is clear: no free speech, no free trade. Why deal with a government that silences its people? Let's keep the pressure on, trusting God to guide this fight for liberty!
"Sir Keir Starmer must embrace Donald Trump's agenda by repealing hate speech laws in order to get a trade deal over the line, a Washington source has told The Independent.
The warning came after the US vice-president suggested a UK-US agreement may be close, with the White House "working very hard" on it.
He told UnHerd: "I think there's a good chance that, yes, we'll come to a great agreement that's in the best interest of both countries."
But a senior Washington figure, who has provided advice for the administration, claimed he is "obsessed by the fall of Western civilisation" – including his view that free speech is being eroded in Britain – and that he will demand the Labour government rolls back laws against hateful comments, including abuse targeting LGBT+ groups or other minorities, as a condition of any deal.
The Independent was told: "The vice-president expressing optimism [on a trade deal] is a way of putting further pressure on the UK over free speech. If a deal does not go through, it makes Labour look bad."
Mr Vance's recent speech to the right-wing Heritage Foundation think tank was cited as an example of his views on Western culture and free speech being linked to securing an agreement.
"No free speech, no deal. It is as simple as that," the Washington source said.
It is understood that Britain has already offered to drop its proposed digital services tax as a means of getting a trade deal through. But the US wants to see laws on hate speech repealed as well as plans for a new online safety law dropped.
Labour has made it clear it is not prepared to go that far. A Downing Street source said the subject "is not a feature of the talks".
However, the issue seems to be one of the main sticking points from the White House's perspective.
Talks began last month after Sir Keir visited Mr Trump in the White House and intensified earlier this month with the tariffs announcement. While tariffs have been suspended for 90 days, the hope is that a deal can be done before they are brought into force.
Downing Street is aiming not for a traditional trade deal, but one focused on growth industries of the future, such as biotech and artificial intelligence.
Ministers insist this will not mean Britain has to accept imports of chlorinated chicken or beef with hormones, which have long been cited as concerns. However, they hope it will see most, if not all, tariffs removed between the two countries.
While Mr Trump's trade secretary Howard Lutnick has taken a leading role in the talks with UK business secretary Jonathan Reynolds, the president announced at the start that Mr Vance would take the overall lead in the negotiations. UK sources have said he has been at the forefront of the tech side of the talks.
This has put the issue of free speech front and centre for Mr Vance and his allies in getting a deal with the UK.
The issue has become a central problem in UK-US relations since the summer riots when Mr Trump ally and X (Twitter) owner Elon Musk launched a vitriolic social media campaign against Sir Keir and his government, with people arrested over tweets.
It continued when Sir Keir visited the White House for the first time since Mr Trump took power and clashed with Mr Vance in front of the TV cameras in the Oval Office. The vice-president claimed that free speech was being undermined and also claimed that laws being brought in for online safety were an attack on US tech giants.
Most recently, the trial of Isabel Vaughan-Spruce for silently praying outside an abortion clinic has become a major issue in the US, with Mr Vance criticising the UK legal system over the case.
In his interview with UnHerd, the vice-president expressed optimism about the talks.
He said: "We're certainly working very hard with Keir Starmer's government.
"The president really loves the United Kingdom. He loved the Queen. He admires and loves the King. It is a very important relationship. And he's a businessman and has a number of important business relationships in [Britain]. But I think it's much deeper than that.
"There's a real cultural affinity. And, of course, fundamentally, America is an Anglo country."
Meanwhile, Mr Reynolds on Tuesday said he had been clear with US counterparts that he did not support Mr Trump's approach on tariffs.
But he said there is a need in some instances to look at how to rebalance world trade to ensure greater fairness.
He said: "I don't support the kind of approach to unilateral tariffs that the US has pursued. We've made that very clear to our US friends and colleagues, but there are issues as to how parts of trading works around the word, and there is a need to look at how we can do that fairly: how we can consider where in some cases countries are not operating to the same rules that we might expect here in the UK?"
Comments