Kemi Badenoch disowns Robert Jenrick's bizarre traitor insult against Keir Starmer
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has distanced herself from a widely condemned tweet by one of her top team describing Keir Starmer as a 'Quisling'.
Shadow justice secretary Robert Jenrick has faced criticism for using the phrase, a term for someone who collaborates with an occupying force in their own country, in a row over the Chagos Islands.
Ms Badenoch's official spokesman effectively disowned the comment, saying she was 'not responsible' for Mr Jenrick's tweets.
But he added that the Tory leader considered Mr Jenrick a 'valued member of the shadow cabinet', saying 'she is not someone who polices tweets'.
Vidkun Quisling was a Norwegian politician and Nazi collaborator who led the puppet government of Norway during World War II.
Mr Jenrick was condemned for his comments by Brendan Cox, the husband of the murdered MP Jo Cox, who said: 'Calling fellow MPs 'quislings' and 'traitors' isn't just a pathetic, and painfully inauthentic, attempt to sound populist - it's also dangerous.
'MPs know they are all at risk from violence, threats and even murder - yet Jenrick uses language that he knows will increase that threat.'
The row centres on the government's plan to hand the Chagos Islands over to Mauritius.
Mr Jenrick's intervention came after reports the UK could end up paying £18 billion instead of the original £9 billion under the original agreement to lease back Diego Garcia for 99 years.
Unlike the original deal, which new Mauritian PM Navin Ramgoolam said was 'not good enough', there would also be no automatic extension mechanism after 99 years.
Shadow home secretary Priti Patel also hit out at the deal.
She said: 'It absolutely looks like a betrayal of the British people, a betrayal of our territory.'
Ms Patel said: 'We should go back to base camp, look at the judgment and say there are other ways of doing this without just handing over a sovereign territory, and certainly without committing anything from £9 billion to £18 billion at a time when we constantly hear from the government there is a financial crisis here.'
Sir Keir has defended the deal, saying: 'This is a military base that is vital to our national security and international security. A number of years ago, the legal certainty of that base was thrown into doubt.
'Without legal certainty, the base cannot operate in practical terms as it should, that is bad for our national security, and it is a gift to our adversaries.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
22 minutes ago
- Leader Live
New House of Lords front door that cost almost £10 million does not work
The project has been described as 'a complete white elephant and a disaster'. Peers heard a member of parliamentary staff had to be permanently stationed at the door to press a button to open it. It also emerged that the price tag of the project spiralled by nearly 60% from the original estimate of £6.1 million. Leader of the Lords Baroness Smith of Basildon said it was 'completely unacceptable' to have a door that did not work properly, and she shared the frustrations, upset 'and every other adjective' members wished to use. There was also a question over whether it would ever be fully operational, she suggested. The bill for what has been described at Westminster as 'one of the most expensive front doors in the world' was made public after peers raised concerns that their requests for the cost of the scheme had been repeatedly stonewalled by the authorities on security grounds. They also said they had warned from the start that the design would not work. Members of the Lords vented their annoyance as they heard plans for commercial procurement in Parliament to be transferred into a new joint department of both Houses. While welcoming the administrative changes, Tory former Cabinet minister Lord Forsyth of Drumlean pressed Lady Smith, who sits on the House of Lords Commission, over the cost of the new front door at the Peers' Entrance. He said: 'Very senior members of this House and members of the commission have been told repeatedly that they cannot know the cost of the front door, because if they knew the cost of the front door that would enable terrorists to work out what the security is surrounding it. 'I suspect that the costs of the front door make it one of the most expensive front doors in the world, and it is a front door that does not work. 'Various Members from all sides of the House protested right at the beginning that this design would not work, as it would result in people having to queue outside to get in and they would therefore be more vulnerable. 'We were told that no, it had been carefully designed and the system had been looked at, but we now discover that we need somebody permanently there to press the button to open the door. 'The other evening someone in a wheelchair was unable to access the House. It is a complete white elephant and a disaster.' The Conservative peer added: 'I do not wish to be unkind to any of the staff who serve this House or to underestimate the difficulties of dealing with a historic building of this kind, but it is simply not acceptable that public money should be spent in this way with such disastrous consequences, with no-one being held to account and no knowledge of the associated costs.' Tory former minister Lord Robathan said: 'If this were in the private sector, I am afraid that people would be sacked.' Lady Smith said: 'On the door itself, there are two issues, cost and operability. 'It is completely unacceptable that we have a door that does not operate as it should.' On the cost she said there was 'wildly exaggerated and incorrect information', adding: 'It is important that we are secure, so the costs of the door are very high. It is not just the security issue but also the heritage issue. 'The initial estimate was £6.1 million for the door. That increased because it was the request of members that it should remain open during the duration of the works when the House was sitting. 'The fact that it could not be closed off to get on with the work meant the cost increased – plus some other issues around heritage were discovered. The total cost has been £9.6 million.' She added: 'That is high, but what is more serious is that, having spent that money, the door does not work. 'That is a huge frustration to everybody. 'One of the reasons that it is not the same as other security pods on the estate is that it has to be fully accessible for those who have mobility issues and wish to use mobility aids or wheelchairs. 'The information I have is that the work that has been ongoing to address the problems has not cost the House any more beyond that. 'However, there is a window where a decision has to be taken on whether or not it will ever be fully operational and serve the needs of this House. 'I share the frustrations, the upset and every other adjective members may wish to use.' Lady Smith told peers: 'When we spend that much money on something that does not work, the key thing is that it is resolved, and that is what I am focused on.'
Western Telegraph
4 hours ago
- Western Telegraph
New House of Lords front door that cost almost £10 million does not work
The project has been described as 'a complete white elephant and a disaster'. Peers heard a member of parliamentary staff had to be permanently stationed at the door to press a button to open it. It also emerged that the price tag of the project spiralled by nearly 60% from the original estimate of £6.1 million. Leader of the Lords Baroness Smith of Basildon said it was 'completely unacceptable' to have a door that did not work properly, and she shared the frustrations, upset 'and every other adjective' members wished to use. There was also a question over whether it would ever be fully operational, she suggested. The bill for what has been described at Westminster as 'one of the most expensive front doors in the world' was made public after peers raised concerns that their requests for the cost of the scheme had been repeatedly stonewalled by the authorities on security grounds. They also said they had warned from the start that the design would not work. Members of the Lords vented their annoyance as they heard plans for commercial procurement in Parliament to be transferred into a new joint department of both Houses. While welcoming the administrative changes, Tory former Cabinet minister Lord Forsyth of Drumlean pressed Lady Smith, who sits on the House of Lords Commission, over the cost of the new front door at the Peers' Entrance. He said: 'Very senior members of this House and members of the commission have been told repeatedly that they cannot know the cost of the front door, because if they knew the cost of the front door that would enable terrorists to work out what the security is surrounding it. 'I suspect that the costs of the front door make it one of the most expensive front doors in the world, and it is a front door that does not work. 'Various Members from all sides of the House protested right at the beginning that this design would not work, as it would result in people having to queue outside to get in and they would therefore be more vulnerable. 'We were told that no, it had been carefully designed and the system had been looked at, but we now discover that we need somebody permanently there to press the button to open the door. 'The other evening someone in a wheelchair was unable to access the House. It is a complete white elephant and a disaster.' The Conservative peer added: 'I do not wish to be unkind to any of the staff who serve this House or to underestimate the difficulties of dealing with a historic building of this kind, but it is simply not acceptable that public money should be spent in this way with such disastrous consequences, with no-one being held to account and no knowledge of the associated costs.' Tory former minister Lord Robathan said: 'If this were in the private sector, I am afraid that people would be sacked.' Lady Smith said: 'On the door itself, there are two issues, cost and operability. 'It is completely unacceptable that we have a door that does not operate as it should.' On the cost she said there was 'wildly exaggerated and incorrect information', adding: 'It is important that we are secure, so the costs of the door are very high. It is not just the security issue but also the heritage issue. 'The initial estimate was £6.1 million for the door. That increased because it was the request of members that it should remain open during the duration of the works when the House was sitting. 'The fact that it could not be closed off to get on with the work meant the cost increased – plus some other issues around heritage were discovered. The total cost has been £9.6 million.' She added: 'That is high, but what is more serious is that, having spent that money, the door does not work. 'That is a huge frustration to everybody. 'One of the reasons that it is not the same as other security pods on the estate is that it has to be fully accessible for those who have mobility issues and wish to use mobility aids or wheelchairs. 'The information I have is that the work that has been ongoing to address the problems has not cost the House any more beyond that. 'However, there is a window where a decision has to be taken on whether or not it will ever be fully operational and serve the needs of this House. 'I share the frustrations, the upset and every other adjective members may wish to use.' Lady Smith told peers: 'When we spend that much money on something that does not work, the key thing is that it is resolved, and that is what I am focused on.'
Daily Mail
4 hours ago
- Daily Mail
QUENTIN LETTS: Mrs Badenoch was perkier than usual. Does she finally glimpse hope?
Does Kemi Badenoch finally glimpse hope? The rotten economic growth figures were published shortly before she made a speech in the City of London. By that time the nation had been subjected to downbeat verdicts on the government's spending splurge and to the sight and sound of Rachel Reeves on the breakfast airwaves. Captain of sinking pedalo urges passengers not to abandon ship. Mrs Badenoch strolled into the low-ceilinged, implausibly-chandeliered function room of one of those modern hotels on the edge of the Square Mile. The event was the FTSE 250+ conference, an assembly of 'key risk-takers' seeking 'sharp perspectives from the front lines of our turbulent, opportunity-rich markets'. A fruit-juice-and-Danish-pastries affair. The session was chaired by an economist, Kallum Pickering, who bluntly told the Tory leader 'we're all a bit grumpy'. Skinny, bearded Kallum explained that the audience – youthful, cologned – felt 'like a stalled engine but with a bit of clear road we could be pumping pistons'. He was resentful of political embuggeration and did not exonerate the last Tory government. Kemi rather agreed with him. She thought Net Zero targets were nuts. She was at ease with these people. It was an easier gig for her, say, than a hall full of public sector workers. She recalled her own City days when she came to 'loathe compliance culture'. The room warmed to that. These were people whose lives are made a misery by human-resources nags. She attacked big corporate outfits that 'profited from bureaucracy'. Did she mean the 'big four' accountancy firms? The audience had not expected her to swipe at their bigger rivals. It gave a purr of approval. Time and again she attacked the 'bloated' state and a Labour cabinet that lacked business experience. A mention of Ms Reeves's fictitious curriculum vitae earned a laugh. Nigel Farage's lot wanted to nationalise industries, keep big benefit bills yet loosen tax bands. 'It's a scam. It's my job to expose this stuff. These are not serious people.' Kallum stroked his beard and pointed out that Reform was ahead in the opinion polls, with the Tories trailing in third place, a distant Austin Allegro with smoke billowing from its bonnet. Kemi: 'We have four years of Labour. From the way people are discussing the opinion polls you'd think there was an election next year. We have to tell people the truth.' Just before Christmas she had spoken to the Canadian Tory leader Pierre Poilievre, who at that point had a 23-point lead in the opinion polls. He has since lost both an election and his parliamentary seat. Things changed fast. Mrs Badenoch can be a dull performer. This time she was perkier. Maybe it was because she could say wonkish things and know that the audience would follow. Maybe it was because of 'events'. In the past fortnight Reform has had internal squabbles and taken a peculiar turn leftwards economically, while taking an anti-liberty step towards a burka ban. Has Mr Farage sacrificed both his authenticity and his cheerfulness? Then came Wednesday's spending review, with its mad billions and the inevitability of tax rises. Dreadful for the country but possibly a reprieve for Mrs Badenoch's Tories. 'It's going to be a revolution,' she said of her plans, breezily. 'We need to unleash animal spirits.' Animal spirits! Helen Whately, shadow welfare secretary, is more mouse than lion. Kemi feared 'the bond vigilantes' were circling over Ms Reeves. The Government's economic policy was 'in a death spiral' and this created a gap for the centre-right. 'That is the space I fill.' Coolly informal, she addressed them conversationally, more a colleague than a would-be political leader. 'I'm on your side,' she cooed, 'but I need you to be on mine, too.' She implored them to 'speak up' and 'tell your customers to speak up, too'. Was that a gurgling 'help, I'm drowning'? Or was it a sense, at last, that her refusal to panic in recent months might finally start to produce buds of a political recovery?
