In the coffee break after Keir Starmer’s speech on civil society on Monday, the mood among charity leaders was positive. Perhaps most of all they liked his defence of the National Trust and RNLI, beloved national charities that have, over the years, been demonised and demeaned by the right. “It’s come to something when the Tories are at war with the National Trust,” the Labour leader had told them. “That’s what happens when politics of self-preservation prevail over commitment to service.” His speech was also symbolic of a broader strategy from Starmer, who has been looking for opportunities to flip the narrative and show that he is not just ducking fights with the Conservatives to deny them electoral dividing lines, as some of his critics suggest. This same strategy was on display earlier this month when he told reporters he was “up for the fight” of defending the “nanny state” as he announced plans to improve child health under a Labour government, including supervised toothbrushing in schools. Party insiders also point to more historic examples such as Starmer’s defence of the England team during Euro 2020 when he accused Boris Johnson of a lack of courage over his reluctance to condemn fans who booed them for taking the knee. Last February he defended the BBC – a frequent target of Tory attack – as a “national treasure” that, along with Channel 4, which faced privatisation, had to be defended from government attacks that “threaten the future of these two great institutions”. Labour strategists believe Starmer’s willingness to take on the Tories – even if defending the National Trust might not seem the riskiest of tactics – flies in the face of claims he is reluctant to do so for fear of it being weaponised at the election. “We always knew that the final year before an election would be about picking sides on things,” one senior aide explained. “It’s not really about the individual rows: we’re trying to tell more of a story about what the party stands for.” His team want to present him as a “normal bloke” – presumably in contrast to Rishi Sunak’s out-of-touchness – who will take a pragmatic approach generally shared by the majority of the country. “There are issues where we think we’re in the mainstream of public opinion,” said one shadow cabinet minister. “What the Tories think is the mainstream has been pulled in ever more extreme directions. That’s why he feels quite confident making those arguments.” Another party insider suggested that dividing lines were chosen carefully. “We’ve always wanted to make the Labour party the natural patriotic choice and we’re always looking for opportunities to do that. It’s a fairly reductive Conservative view that everybody is quite rightwing on everything”. The Labour figure said, however, that Starmer had to strike the right balance between “not being baited by mad things the Tories come out with” and waiting for the right moment “like a boxer ducking and diving and picking the right approach”. More importantly, it is not just culture war issues that have been picked to create some dividing lines, but also significant policy areas like illegal immigration. Starmer has said that he would repeal the government’s flagship Rwanda legislation if he wins power. Again, he cites pragmatism. The policy would not work in practice, he argues, although it does highlight Tory division and Sunak’s depleted authority on the issue. He would, instead, seek an EU-wide returns agreement for people who seek asylum in Britain. Several shadow cabinet ministers refer to Starmer as the “quiet radical”, insisting that his five “mission documents” are actually extremely ambitious – even if they have been criticised in some quarters for their lack of detail – because he actually intends to deliver on them. His dividing lines strategy, however, has its limits. The Labour leader has said little to differentiate himself from the government on issues including transgender rights, public sector pay, the two-child benefit cap and even his position on a Gaza ceasefire. His aides deny this proves his reticence to take on difficult issues, arguing instead that it would be easier to take the path of least resistance by siding with Labour activists, and he has “taken brickbats” from his own side as a result. Perhaps the biggest test of his boldness is yet to come: to stand firm on Labour’s commitment to its £28bn green prosperity fund or decide that he would be electorally better off if he backed away. One party insider said: “It’s about fight or flight. We don’t yet know which is his instinct.”