Badenoch says her migration plan ‘credible’, but won’t say where 150,000 people a year being removed will go
Badenoch is now being asked about her removals plan.
Asked where she would deport 150,000 a year to, Badenoch says “not here”.
They do not belong here. They are committing crimes. They are hurting people. We have been trying to deport so many people and have been facing obstacles in the legal system. That’s why we’re leaving the ECHR …
I’m tired of us asking asking all of these irrelevant questions about where should they go? They will go back to where they should do or another country, but they should not be here.
We need to look after the people in our country, but it’s irrelevant to say where would they go. It is not. The most relevant question is, should they be here?
If they should not be here, then they need to be removed.
She suggests, if people focus on these questions, they will not do anything.
The logical conclusion of what you’re saying is that, let’s just give up. It’s just all too difficult. This is how we’ve got to this mess. We cannot have this attitude anymore. That is why we have come up with a credible plan.
Key events
Prof Sir John Curtice, the leading psephologist, has told the Mirror that Kemi Badenoch is failing to make an impact with voters. He said:
The Tories are now barely more popular with those that voted Brexit than they are with the people who voted Remain, despite being the party that delivered Brexit.
Has Badenoch been able to deal with the challenge posed by Farage and Reform? No. Has she managed to make an impression on the public? No ….
The underlying thing with her numbers is not that she’s not popular, it’s that nobody knows who she is. There’s always been this remarkable mismatch between her long-standing levels of popularity among Conservative activists, and her low visibility among the wider public.
There are more quotes in the full Mirror story here.
Other polling specialists have said the same thing. This is what Andrew Cooper, who was director of strategy for David Cameron when he was PM, told the Observer.
Sometimes someone will say a name, but often they will get it wrong … In dozens of focus groups all over the country, not a single person has been able to think of a single thing Kemi Badenoch has said or done since she became leader. The biggest risk for the Tories is that they are drifting to irrelevance.
Hilary Benn says it’s ‘totally irresponsible’ for Tories to propose ECHR withdrawal because of impact on Good Friday agreement
Hilary Benn, the Northern Ireland secretary, has said that it is “totally irresponsible” for the Conservative to propose withdrawing from the European convention on human rights because of the impact that would have on the peace process in Northern Ireland. He posted these on social media.
1. When the Northern Ireland Bill to implement the Good Friday Agreement (GFA) was debated in the House of Commons on 20 July 1998, the then Conservative opposition gave it its full support. The GFA has resulted in over 27 years of peace after the trauma of the Troubles
2. And yet the Conservative party has now joined Reform in advocating a policy that could undermine the Good Friday Agreement – namely by proposing to withdraw the UK from the European Convention on Human Rights.
3. Until recently, it was completely unthinkable that a party aspiring to govern the United Kingdom would countenance putting that Agreement at risk, given that ECHR membership is one of the GFA’s founding pillars.
4. Or that they would seek to put the UK in the same group as Belarus and Russia as the only three countries in Europe which would not be signatories to the Convention. Utterly irresponsible.
Lord Wolfson argues that, legally, the UK could leave the ECHR without undermining the Good Friday agreement. His briefing paper relies on some of the arguments in a recent report from the Policy Exchange thinktank making this argument.
But critics say the political objections to ECHR withdrawal from supporters of the Good Friday agreement would be as strong or stronger than the legal arguments. In his report Wolfson seems to accept this, saying “the political arguments [relating to ECHR withdrawal and Northern Ireland] at play are complex, and are beyond the scope of this legal advice”.
This is from Beth Rigby, Sky News’ political editor, on Kemi Badenoch’s interview with Laura Kuenssberg this morning.
The whole pitch for this conference is that Badenoch is the only politician with detailed and credible plans for the country, arguing that Lab didn’t have plan for govt. But she does not explain in detail to @bbclaurak her plan for deport 150k a year. “That’s the least relevant Q” an odd thing to say when asked where will people go given that the Rwanda scheme never got off the ground. Many people will think it’s very relevant
There is a flick of it when Badenoch starts talking about a removals forces, returns scheme with visa sanctions, but she only begins to talk about this when pressed repeatedly. It’s curious, as this was her stage to offer a detailed plan and show public that Conservatives can deliver
Stephen Bush, the political commentator at the Financial Times, is far more brutal.
Badenoch is the most compelling of the current party leaders because of the gulf between who she believes herself to be (she visibly thinks she is a bold thinker) and the reality (incredibly lazy and partisan).
Tories publish 185-page report from shadow attorney general Lord Wolfson on case for leaving ECHR
The Conservative party has just published the 185-page report from Lord Wolfson KC, the shadow attorney general, on the case for leaving the European convention on human rights. Wolfson says the ECHR limits the freedom of the UK government to act in five areas where Kemi Badenoch set tests for staying in, and he argues that leaving is feasible. An extract was leaked last week.
Badenoch says Tories may have paid ‘small political price’ in polls because she has taken time developing policy
In her interview with Laura Kuenssberg, Kemi Badenoch defended her decision to take her time as Tory leader developing policy. But she admitted that there may have been a “a small political price to pay in the polls” as a result.
When it was put to her that this had left her party floundering in the polls, she replied:
It will pay off. Nothing good comes quickly or fast. It will pay off. I’m an engineer and the way that I was taught to do things is you have a plan, you work it through.
It’s not about being the first to announce a policy. It’s about having the best policy. That is what I’m offering.
And, yes, there may have been a small political price to pay in the polls. It will pay off eventually.
What we cannot have is more and more of the same failed politics of people just rushing out, not knowing what they’re doing, saying whatever whatever, and then making a mess of people’s lives.
Mahmood says rising antisemitism has led to ‘dark forces running amok’ in Britain
In an interview with Times Radio, Shabana Mahmood, the home secretary, claimed there were “dark forces running amok” in the country. Referring to the rise in antisemitism, she said:
We have a broader problem of a rise not only in antisemitism but in other forms of hatred as well.
There are clearly malign and dark forces running amok across our country.
It’s a challenge for governments of all stripes to work out how to deal with these issues without placing more pressure, and frankly more unwanted burden and responsibility, on minority communities.
The Liberal Democrats have criticised today’s Home Office announcement about giving the police new powers to restrict protests. Max Wilkinson, the Lib Dem home affairs spokesperson, said:
People spreading antisemitic hate and inciting violence against Jews are getting away with it, and we fear the government’s approach will do nothing to tackle that while undermining the fundamental right to peaceful protest.
The Conservatives made a total mess of protest laws and left us with the worst of all worlds – wasting police time arresting people for legitimate peaceful protest, while letting others get away with inciting violence. I fear Labour seem to be following them down the same path, instead of properly reforming these powers to focus on the real criminals and hate preachers.
How Badenoch failed repeatedly to explain where 150,000 illegal migrants she wants to deport every year will go
Laura Kuenssberg tried pretty hard to get an answer from Kemi Badenoch about where the 150,000 illegal migrants she wants to deport every year will go, but did not get very far. For the record, here is the exchange in full.
LK: You are promising you would remove 150,000 people who don’t have permission to be here every year. That’s the population of a city like Cambridge or a place like Blackpool. It’s a lot of people. You’d leave the European convention on human rights in order to make it easier. Where on earth would they all go?
KB: The fact is there are too many people in our country who should not be here. That is why today I’m going to be talking about that borders plan you just outlined …
People need to go back to their countries. They can go to safe third countries if that’s the best thing for them. We had a Rwanda plan, we had a deterrent, that was already working in terms of deterring people before it had even come into place.
LK: The evidence on that is disputed.
KB: I’m sure people will dispute it, but the point is Labour scrapped it, they had no plan, they said they were going to smash the gangs and crossings have increased about 40%.
LK: So where would you propose that 150,000 people would go? Because the original Rwanda plan was going to take perhaps 1,000 people over five years. Where would those people all go?
KB: Not here, not here. They do not belong here. They are committing crimes. They are hurting people. We have been trying to deport so many people and have been facing obstacles in the legal system. That’s why we’re leaving the ECHR.
We tried to deport a Jamaican national who had committed crimes. Shabana Mahmood and Keir Starmer wrote a letter asking us not to deport him. He went on to kill someone else later.
I’m tired of us asking asking all of these irrelevant questions about where should they go? They will go back to where they should do or another country, but they should not be here.
I’m tired of us asking all of these irrelevant questions about where should they go. They will go back to where they should do, or another country, but they should not be here. We need to look after the people in our country. It’s not fair.
LK: It’s not irrelevant to say where would they go.
KB: The most relevant question is, should they be here? If they should not be here, then they need to be removed.
The logically conclusion of what you’re saying is that, let’s just give up, it’s just all too difficult. This is how we’ve got to this mess. We cannot have this attitude anymore. That is why we have come up with a credible plan.
LK: Tell us credibly where they will go.
KB: I’ve answered that question. They will go back to where they came from. That’s what they need to do.
We cannot have a situation where we can’t deport people and say, well we don’t know where they go, so they can just stay here. That is basically inviting every single person across the world to our shores because we don’t know where they would go afterwards. This is a fatalistic and defeatist attitude and I will not have that …
LK: You say you have a credible plan. Tell us credibly how you are going to get 150,000 people every year to leave this country and go back to countries like Afghanistan, Iraq, Eritrea.
KB: They have come from all over the world. Voluntary returns do happen, but that is why we’re having the removals force. We’ll be standing up a force that does not exist right now …
When I was in Epping talking to the families of children who have been hurt, one of them sexually assaulted, they are not interested in these sorts of questions. They want to know why government is failing them.
It is not fair on people in our communities across the country to pay the price for this. It was not fair for all of those girls who had foreigners raping them in the grooming gangs to still be living in the community with their victims. That is not right.
In one respect, Badenoch’s failure to be able to answer a straightforward question about a flagship policy is a colossal weakness – especially given that she is trying to make the point that her plans to deal with immigration are “serious”, unlike Reform UK’s.
But perhaps she does not think it will matter. As Donald Trump has established, some voters respond better to outrage than to competence. They like a tear-up-the-rules authoritarian who is contemptous of journalists asking technical questions and who just wants to get things done. This is a role Badenoch performs well; having rows with journalists is something she seems to enjoy.
But, if this is the plan, it does not fit well with the strategy that Badenoch set out when she was elected last year. At that point she declared she wanted to wait two years before announcing policy, because she wanted to work on it properly, and she implied that it did not matter if the Tories kept a low profile for a bit because, after the election defeat, people would not be listening to them anyway.
Also, there is already an ‘outrage, not competence’ UK politician in the field. It is Nigel Farage. Labour recently put out a press release with six examples of Farage or his party giving “don’t know” answers to questions. They even set up a spoof website about Reform’s don’t know manifesto. But it does not seem to have dented Reform’s opinion poll lead.
Badenoch claims Tory Rwanda plan was ‘already working’ as deterrent before it was scrapped
Kemi Badenoch claimed that the last government’s plan to sent asylum seekers arriving on small boats to Rwanda was already working as a deterrent before it was abandoned by Labour.
The last government legislated for the Rwanda plan, but it never properly implemented. There were no flights carrying people to Rwanda because they were being deported under its provisions. Only four people went voluntarily, accepting a payment to relocate.
But Badenoch told Laura Kuenssberg this morning:
People need to go back to their countries. They can go to safe third countries if that’s the best thing for them. We had a Rwanda plan, we had a deterrent, that was already working in terms of deterring people before it had even come into place.
Badenoch did not offer any evidence to back up this claim. But she may have been referring to anecdotal evidence from France where, before the election, some asylum seekers told reporters they were postponing travel until after the election because they knew Labour would scrap the Rwanda scheme.
Labour says Badenoch ‘can’t answer basic questions’ about her deportations policy
The Labour party has issued this response to Kemi Badenoch’s interview with Laura Kuenssberg. (See 9.48am.) A Labour spokesperson said:
Kemi Badenoch has been Conservative leader for 338 days now and the British people are still waiting for an apology for the mistakes her party made. Her Conservative party has learned absolutely nothing from 14 years of failure.
Badenoch can’t answer the most basic questions about the policies she’s supposedly spent months thinking about. It’s the same old Tory party making the same old mistakes – and the public shouldn’t and won’t forgive them.
Badenoch claims UK economy will be ‘on fire’ if Reform UK wins election, because Farage will spend ‘loads’ on welfare
Q: Isn’t your borders plan just about signalling to Nigel Farage that, if the Tories are the largest party, you will prop him up?
Badenoch does not accept that.
She claims Farage wants to spend “loads and loads of money on welfare”. She says the economy will be “on fire” if he gets into power.
She says the Tories are the only party with a credible plan.
And Reform UK are not experienced, she says.
Can you imagine what it would be like the people who’ve never been in government before? They’ll be learning all the job. they won’t be able to deliver, and our country will be in a much worse place.
Only the Conservative party can deliver both the competency and the bravery to deal with these tough decisions.
Badenoch claims she can be next PM, saying ‘the polling will change’
Q: In some polls the Tories are doing worse than the Liberal Democrats.
Badenoch says she has said time and time again “we have to hold our nerve” because the Tories will face tough times. It is going to be “very bumpy”. In the past opposition parties have been out of office for 14, 13 or 18 years. She want the Tories to be back in power in four.
Q: Are you saying you can be the next PM with the polling as it is now?
Badenoch replies:
Yes. And the polling will change.
She claims spending time developing “robust policies” will work.
Badenoch says she supports the right to protest. But the government has to stop the “climate of intimidation and fear” that Jews face.
Q: Gideon Falter, chief executive of the Campaign Against Antisemitism, says the PM has blood on his hands because of his decision to recognise the state of Palestine, which he says encouraged extremism. Do you agree?
Badenoch says she would not use that language. But she says the fact that Falter said this showed Keir Starmer had let down the Jewish community.
Badenoch says all Tory election candidates in future will have to back ECHR withdrawal
Q: Robert Jenrick says people who do not back leaving the ECHR should be removed as candidates. Do you agree?
Badenoch says the party will not let people stand as candidates if they do not support ECHR withdrawal. They can be party members and not support the policy, but not election candidates.
UPDATE: Badenoch said:
If you do not agree with leaving the ECHR, then you should not and cannot stand as a Conservative candidate.
Asked whether she will “kick people out” if they rebel on this issue, she said:
They can be in the party, but they cannot stand as MPs.
We have lots of members who have lots of views, we don’t remove people for having slightly different views on policy.
But if you want to be a member of parliament as a Conservative, then you need to understand that leaving the ECHR is a manifesto commitment.
