Kemi's incompetence no surprise to Spectator staff
Confronted with a poll of party members on grassroots Tory website ConservativeHome showing a majority think she is failing to deliver any actual policies the electorate can get get behind, Badenoch responded with her usual barrage of bluster, bombast and baloney: 'We are working on the plans! We have policies when we need them! I won't be rushed!'
For staff at the Spectator long in the tooth enough crossed paths with Kemi Badenoch – the magazine's head of digital from 2015 to 2016 – this morning's Radio 4 Today interview with Amol Rajan was shudderingly familiar.
The motormouth rhetoric coupled with a complete absence of any concrete strategy for containing the rising threat of Nigel Farage's Reform party came as no surprise to those who endured similar spiels in her brief tenure at the right wing magazine.
'She was unbelievably crap,' one Spectator insider told magazine The Fence in 2022. Badenoch operated a 'kiss up, kick down' policy – brown-nosing editor at the time Fraser Nelson and chairman Andrew Neil while being rude and difficult to junior staff.
'She would come to meetings and blether on and on about her long term strategy for success,' another co-worker at the time told Rats in a Sack. 'The trouble is, nothing ever actually happened. She was just a major league jazz hands merchant and utterly hopeless at getting stuff done. None of us could understand why she was in the job.'
In a brief post describing her time at the Spectator and its sister magazine Apollo, Badenoch claimed: 'I redesigned and delivered the digital strategy for these two publications.'
'Typical Kemi,' her former colleague told Rats. 'What does it actually mean? And what did she actually achieve? The answer to both questions is: nothing.'
Badenoch has been lead of the opposition for six months. Whether she lasts longer in this job than she did at the Speccie remains to be seen.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
18 minutes ago
- The Independent
What would a Tory spending review look like? With Badenoch, nobody knows
It would be an exaggeration to claim the nation eagerly awaits the invention of 'Badenomics' but Conservatives are certainly impatient with Kemi Badenoch 's apparent inability to create a narrative on the economy, land blows on a weakened Labour government, or compete with Nigel Farage's Reform UK on a key electoral issue. This week's Labour announcements on winter fuel payments and the spending review offer some prime opportunities to 'punch through'. What is the problem? It's hardly confined to today's Conservatives; every political party that has been in power and badly loses an election finds it difficult to get a hearing. Policies the party are most closely identified with are the ones recently and decisively rejected by voters. How far should a heavily defeated team try to claim that they were right all along and that the electorate made the wrong decision? This might be termed the 'blame the voters' approach; while some buyer's remorse may have set in, it's rather futile to attack the electorate. Alternatively, a party can admit mistakes as a means of resetting voter appeal, but that means upsetting former colleagues and handing your enemies an easy win. What are the Conservatives doing about it? Making speeches, for now, rather than policy… and trying to plot a path to redemption. Last week, perhaps in response to internal concerns, shadow chancellor Mel Stride came as close as possible to apologising for the Liz Truss mini-Budget without actually saying 'sorry'. 'Contrition' is the preferred term. Truss has proved to be a potent political weapon, but for the Labour Party, scarcely a day goes by without Keir Starmer or Rachel Reeves making a scathing reference to that disaster. Stride was critical of it at the time, having left the government and as chair of the Treasury select committee; his apology-adjacent speech won't stop Labour deploying Agent Truss (and she keeps popping up, unhelpfully) but it might blunt the attacks somewhat. What are the Tories saying about the rest of their record? Still fairly proud of it. Badenoch says the Tories made 'a lot of good things happen', such as reforms to social security, plus 'near full employment' and raising school standards. 'But people remember the most recent period … and I think the most recent period was the most difficult,' she concedes. So it is Rishi Suank's fault for 'talking right, governing left' as she has put it. So Badenoch is sorry-not-sorry? The Tory mistakes she points to, such as on Brexit and net zero, actually come from the right, not the centre, and don't necessarily chime with public opinion. A passionate and now obdurate Eurosceptic, she seems to want more Brexit at a time when the voters have concluded it was a flop; as the years go on, she'll need to say if she would reverse Starmer's 'Brexit reset' that builds closer, easier relations with the EU. She will also be asked if she would scrap planning reforms that boost growth, stop skilled migration, bring back zero-hours contracts, reduce VAT on private school fees, and so on. She will also need to eat many of her own words as a minister on climate change and green growth, now she's a 'net zero sceptic'. She may hope to win back some Reform voters by tacking to the right, but she can never out-Farage Farage. Indeed, she's ridiculed him for promising economic fantasies, so how can she now embrace them and return to Boris Johnson-era cakeism? Where are the Tories with winter fuel payments for pensioners? They are demanding an apology from Labour. But Labour's present policy is identical to Badenoch's – restore the payment for all now, but try to means-test it later – so she is disarmed, and cannot even claim credit for forcing the U-turn, which was obviously down to Labour panic after local election losses. And what do the Tories say about the spending review? Badenoch's line is that there would not be a black hole in public finances if they'd won the last election, and taxes would be lower. The latter part is true, but equally a hypothetical Tory government would now be imposing an even more painful squeeze on social security and public services, to the point where the numbers would simply not be credible, leading to strikes. Voters sensed this unreality last July, and as time passes the Tories will have to come up with credible plans of their own rather than relying on Jeremy Hunt's pre-election claims. Anything else? Plenty. Stride may be doing his best, but Badenoch seems more interested in 'culture wars' than macroeconomics, which is a problem. Her shadow frontbench team is surprisingly lacking in talent and Labour ministers, despite their relative inexperience, mostly run rings around their opponents. Can the Conservatives forge the 'Right Approach' again? In truth, the Tories are on a long march back to the centre and sooner or later will have to accept climate change and exorcise the ghosts of Truss and Johnson. They need to show themselves trustworthy and realistic, and willing to compromise with their lost voters. These are the kinds of radical, symbolic 'unthinkable' things Tony Blair had to do to make Labour electable in the 1990s, and Starmer did afresh in recent years. Only then will voters lend their ears. Badenoch isn't the leader for that task.
The National
an hour ago
- The National
A centrist position can only be justified after equality is achieved
Inequality isn't neutral, it's a tilted seesaw. It pushes the poorest further down while boosting the wealth realisation and accumulation of the richest. To stand atop that imbalance and declare yourself 'perfectly balanced' is at best disingenuously counterproductive, and at worst outright delusional. What's needed is not performative equilibrium, but structural redress. Redistribution of wealth, regulation of exploitative advantage, restoration of public infrastructure, and creation of genuine opportunity – these are the conditions that lift people out of inequality. Only then, once the seesaw is levelled, can a centrist stance become viable. Balance must be built, not assumed. The centre can only hold if the extremes are held in fair tension. Labour offer nothing to correct the imbalance. Kemi Badenoch blames those weighing the seesaw down, as though the gravity of individual circumstances were a moral failing. Reform UK want to demolish the entire playground because it's 'too expensive', with no coherent plan to rebuild – just the fantasy that further disruption equals progress. The SNP, in government, have at least tried to steady the seesaw – tried to share the swings, repair the climbing frame, and offer fairer play. But they don't own the playground. They're fenced into Westminster's turf, and Keir Starmer seems determined to keep the gates locked. Ron Lumiere via email THE lesson from the Hamilton by-election result for the SNP is to let Labour and the Tories fight it out with Reform UK to represent the dwindling number of myopically indoctrinated supporters of the Union and focus on the critical argument that only independence can bring about a radical 'change in direction' for the UK through the constitutional change necessary to seriously address the fundamental problems confronting 'broken Brexit Britain'. The lesson for First Minister John Swinney is that it is now urgent that he arouse the passion and vigour for independence quietly dormant within him or step aside, at least from the leadership of the SNP, and support an individual who can inspiringly lead the country to independence before the end of this decade. A majority of MSPs supporting independence in the next Scottish election must represent a mandate for the Scottish Parliament to hold a binding constitutional referendum which, if denied by the UK Government, must legitimately underpin making the next General Election a 'de facto referendum' on independence. A majority of votes at the Scottish election must represent a mandate to commence independence negotiations should the UK Government fail, over a maximum period of one year, to pass legislation enabling the Scottish Parliament to hold constitutional referenda. Manifestos of the SNP and the other independence parties should both state these commitments and state the necessary actions that will follow should a resultant mandate be met with continued undemocratic intransigence by the UK Government. Further procrastination by the UK Government on implementing the democratically expressed wishes of the people of Scotland must not be accepted. To paraphrase the currently popular words of Roman General Vegetius, if you want true democracy, prepare to fight cynical totalitarianism. Stan Grodynski Longniddry, East Lothian AS a 'grassroots' member of the Alba party, let me send a message of solidarity to the erstwhile estranged 'grassroots' SNP people of good will who, for completely understandable reasons, are having a crisis of faith in their leadership. I speak for myself and for the majority of my co-activists in Alba when I say that a reunification process involving at the very least a common electoral strategy is an increasingly urgent necessity not only for an independence super-majority next year but equally in order to restore the 'brotherly love' that will silence the peals of laughter that have been echoing in the the corridors and bars of Westminster for too long. The Alba 'schism', I think most of you recognise now, was based on fundamental concerns relating to the priorities of the SNP leadership at that time in civic, judicial and civic matters. Many supporters no doubt shared some of those concerns but chose to bravely fight on within the ranks, hoping to maintain the post-2014 momentum generated by all of us. Those days, and the resentments and misunderstandings that proceeded from them, are past now and in the 'past they must remain' if we are to deliver a nation fit for our children and grandchildren. This is no time for huffs and hubris. That will require explicit, authentic and visible acts of forgiveness and reconciliation personally and collectively across the entire movement. I have made a start. It is not easy, but it is great to feel renewed camaraderie. We need SNP/Alba events formally and informally across this land, starting now. Alba speakers need to be invited to all SNP events and vice-versa to allow ice to melt sufficiently before next spring, and full participation and collaboration in all the Yes movement events ' under one banner' to reignite unity of purpose is essential. Those of you who agree with these sentiments, please make that abundantly clear to your departing or aspiring leadership, and perhaps through the course of these next 12 months we will once again 'be brithers a' for a' that' Dr Andrew Docherty Selkirk
Daily Mirror
3 hours ago
- Daily Mirror
We'll turn page on 200 year shame - and it's just the start says Angela Rayner
I'll never forget the anger I felt when Suella Braverman claimed rough sleeping was 'a lifestyle choice.' As if the danger and hardship of living on the streets was some kind of holiday option – when most rough sleepers have no choice at all. The fact she was Home Secretary when she said those words back 2023 made it even more shocking. Just a year before, Parliament had voted to repeal the Vagrancy Act a shameful 200-year-old law that criminalises rough sleeping. But her Tory government failed to go through with scrapping it fully. Three years on, this Labour government will finally finish the job by scrubbing the Vagrancy Act from the statute books once and for all. We are drawing a line under nearly two centuries of injustice towards some of the most vulnerable in society – people who deserve dignity and support. No one should ever be criminalised simply for sleeping rough and by ending this archaic law, we are making sure it can never happen again. Of course, this does not mean that the job is done. It sends a clear message that rough sleeping is not a crime to be punished. But to get back on track to ending homelessness for good we must tackle its root causes. Everyone deserves a safe, decent, affordable home. And yet this dream is out of reach for far too many people across our country. We've inherited the worst housing crisis in living memory. Rough sleeping soaring, record numbers of families living in B&Bs. And to our nation's shame more than 165,000 children remain stuck in temporary accommodation. My family didn't have much growing up. But we had a council house which gave me the security I needed to get on in life. Thousands of kids don't have that luxury. This is what keeps me up at night and drives our mission to end this crisis. Through our Plan for Change we will build 1.5m new homes - including the biggest wave of affordable and social housing in a generation. We've already topped up investment for this by £800 million. And we're providing another £2 billion top-up for next year too with more funding to come in the Spending Review. And we won't stop there. Through our landmark Renters' Rights Bill we are banning no fault evictions to give millions of people renting more security. At the same time, we're investing almost £1 billion - into tackling homelessness and rough sleeping - including a £233 million boost for this year. And we're taking important steps to boost housing availability too. This includes reforming Right to Buy so councils can keep the money they make from sales. They will then invest these funds back into building and buying more homes. On top of this we've made £450 million available for councils to provide housing for families at risk of homelessness. But we know that funding is only part of the solution. That's why we're creating a long-term homelessness strategy with prevention at its heart. Providing the long-term quality homes people deserve. Bringing homelessness to an end won't be easy. It will take time and commitment to achieve. Scrapping the Vagrancy Act is an important step on this journey of reform. Just look how far Britain has come in the two centuries since the Act was first introduced. Slavery was abolished, women won their fight to vote and equality was enshrined in law. The foundations of our welfare state was laid by the post war Labour government. These groundbreaking reforms, and others, improved the lives of millions of ordinary people. They made Britain a freer, fairer more tolerant society. And we are proud to be following in the footsteps of the reformers of the past today as we lay the foundations for a better future. Building the homes we need and creating a country that delivers for everyone. So that a good home is no longer a 'lifestyle choice' for a lucky few - but the foundation of a good life for all.
