Badenoch: I'm glad Tory defectors are going to Reform
Kemi Badenoch has said she was happy to see a slew of Tory politicians defect to Reform UK because they were not real conservatives.
Speaking at the Scottish Tory conference in Edinburgh, the Tory leader said that Reform was ' not a centre-Right party ' because it backed nationalisation and raising state benefits.
Mrs Badenoch said 'Nigel Farage is taking out of the Conservative Party the people who are not conservatives' and she was 'quite fine with that'. She said that she wanted an 'authentic Conservative Party'.
She also alleged that Mr Farage was a 'threat to the Union' because Reform MSPs would put the SNP back into power after next year's Holyrood election.
Fourteen Tory councillors in Scotland have defected to Reform and an MSP, Jamie Greene, has switched to the Liberal Democrats.
Mr Greene said: 'Her instinct to casually dismiss anyone scunnered with the Conservatives illustrates perfectly just how out of touch she is with the existential crisis her party faces.
'By undoing Ruth Davidson's broad-church conservativism in favour of Right-wing propaganda, she and Russell Findlay seem set to consign the Scottish Tories to the history books for a generation.'
Dozens of Conservative councillors have also switched sides in England, including Sarah Pochin, who is now an MP after winning the Runcorn and Helsby by-election.
Other high-profile politicians who have defectors from the Conservatives since the general election include Marco Longhi and Dame Andrea Jenkyns, two former Tory MPs, and Tim Montgomerie, a conservative commentator.
But Mrs Badenoch said: ' Reform are not a centre-Right party. This is a party that's talking about nationalising oil and gas.
'This is a party that wants to increase benefits at a time when the benefits bill is so high. So if Nigel Farage is taking out of the Conservative Party the people who are not Conservatives, then I'm quite fine with that.
'One of the things that we ned to do is make sure that people see an authentic Conservative Party, we don't want people who want nationalisation and more benefits.
'If offering a very, very clear kind of conservatism is now sending out the people from our party who don't believe in our values in the long run, that's a good thing.'
She added there was no point in 'accumulating lots of people who don't believe in conservativism just so we can win', adding: 'Then when we get into government, we can't govern.
'We want to have people who believe in our agenda, not just people who want to be politicians.'
'Not worried about the SNP'
The Tories have been the main opposition party to the SNP since 2016 but polls suggest they could end up finishing fourth in next year's Holyrood election, behind the Nationalists, Labour and Reform.
Mr Farage was asked in April which candidate for first minister his MSPs would support in a vote that takes place after each election.
Anas Sarwar, the Scottish Labour leader, may need the support of other Unionist parties to get more votes than John Swinney, the SNP leader and current First Minister.
But Mr Farage said that Reform MSPs would not endorse Mr Sarwar under any circumstances and he was 'not that worried about the SNP'.
Mrs Badenoch used her keynote conference speech to attack Reform, warning that ' the Union is just not that important to them '.
She said: 'In April this year, Nigel Farage said he would be fine with the SNP winning another five years in power.
'He's fine with another five years of higher bills, longer waiting lists, declining school standards, gender madness, and ultimately, independence. Reform will vote to let the SNP in, Conservatives will only ever vote to get the Nationalists out.'
Asked later if she considered Mr Farage to be a threat to the Union, she said: 'If he wants the SNP to have another five years, then that is a threat to the Union. So, yes.'
A Reform UK spokesman said: 'Kemi is losing councillors to Reform in droves because the Tory party has become indistinguishable from their Labour counterparts.
'After decades of failed leadership, false promises, and under delivery, voters are turning to us by the dozen – the only party that will prioritise the best interest of Britons, secure our borders, and return accountability to politics.
'We will continue to welcome anyone who shares our vision for integrity, accountability, and meaningful change to join us.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
22 minutes ago
- BBC News
Canada extend pathway pilot to support skilled refugees to get permanent residency
Canada don extend dia Economic Mobility Pathways Pilot (EMPP) wey go help refugees and oda vulnerable pipo to apply for permanent residency. According to Immigration, Refugees and Citizenship Canada (IRCC), di EMPP na economic immigration pathway wey recognise di human and social capital of refugees. E add say di pathway also cover oda displaced pipo wey get skills and qualifications wey meet di needs of Canadian employers. Canada announce say di EMPP program for refugees and oda vulnerable pipo dey help fill di labour shortage for di kontri. "To continue to dey meet labour market needs, di goment of Canada dey extend di federal stream of di EMPP until December 31, 2025." Dis dey come afta Canada announce say dem go reduce permanent residency targets from 395,000 for 2025, 380,000 for 2026, and 365,000 for 2027, according to dia report for October 2024. Wetin be EMPP for refugees and vulnerable Di Economic Mobility Pathways Pilot (EMPP) na Canada first complementary pathway for refugee labour mobility. According to Canada immigration ministry, dis na safe, legal immigration pathways for refugees and pesin wey get "similar protection needs outside of, and in addition to, traditional resettlement". "Since di EMPP inception, candidates don fill labour market needs across di kontri for in-demand sectors, including health care wey get more dan 30% of total admissions, construction and food service. "From 2019 to di end of March 2025, 970 pipo dey admitted into Canada through dis pathway. Di EMPP na part of Canada broader immigration strategy to "promote economic growth, address labour market needs and help newcomers to settle for communities across di kontri". Why di extension According to IRCC, di extension of di EMPP na to allow more workers to benefit from di pathway program so dem go fit contribute to Canada economy. However, di expected annual intake cap for di job offer stream for 2025 na 950 applications, and e go help di applicants to fit apply for permanent residency. "Dis program dey help skilled refugees and vulnerable pipo to apply for permanent residence while dem go support employers for critical sectors wey dey face labour market shortages." "Di extension go allow more workers for essential sectors such as health care to benefit from di pilot pathway to permanent residence and continue to contribute to our economy," di goment tok for statement. Meanwhile, on di oda hand, IRCC dey reduce score of married pipo wey dey enta or wan stay for Canada but declare dia spouse as "non-accompanying". Di "non- accompanying" option dey help married workers choose if dia spouse dey come wit dem or not, if dem wan apply for di permanent residency. Canada opposition party call for immigration cut Leader of di opposition Conservative Party Pierre Poilievre say Canada goment gatz impose wetin im call "severe limits" on population growth. Poilievre say im dey concerned about di uncontrolled immigration, strained public services, and rising crime. Wen di Conservative Party leader dey follow journalists tok, e say di Liberal Party goment dey allow population increase wey dey put pressure ontop Canada infrastructure and borders. According to Statistics Canada, population for Canada bin grow by nearly 9% between 2021 and 2024, wey make am reach a milestone of 41 million pipo for March 2024. Meanwhile under former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Canada bin welcome about 500,000 permanent residents annually, but e later release a policy wey im wan use reduce dat number. "We dey reduce from 500,000 permanent residents to 395,000 for 2025; reduce from 500,000 permanent residents to 380,000 for 2026 and set a target of 365,000 permanent residents for 2027," di new plan under former PM Trudeau show. Wen PM Mark Carney enta office, e also get plan to reduce di number of pipo wey dey enta Canada. However, Conservative leader Poilievre say Carney dey follow di steps of im predecessor, and allege say e no dey control di immigration policy. "Carney dey continue wit Trudeau disastrous immigration policy of uncontrolled population growth." "We need lower levels and end to di abuse of di refugee, international student and foreign worker programs," Poilievre tok.
Telegraph
an hour ago
- Telegraph
Cambridge University ‘discriminates' against white job seekers
The University of Cambridge has been accused of discriminating against white job seekers. Guidance issued at the world-leading university advises departments to 'try to ensure' that at least one candidate from 'underrepresented groups' is invited for every interview. The 'diverse recruitment framework' further encourages recruiters to readvertise positions if the longlist of candidates 'is not diverse', is all white or male. The guidance, currently in use at the university, also says interview panels should be 'diverse both in gender and race' and composed of individuals who have taken training courses in equality, diversity, inclusion (EDI) and unconscious bias. Edward Skidelsky, the lecturer in philosophy at the University of Exeter and director of the Committee for Academic Freedom, said the policies were 'tantamount to discrimination against white applicants'. 'This is one of the worst cases we have come across of EDI interference in what should be a purely academic process,' he said. 'Favouritism towards women and non-whites demeans them, and encourages the very prejudices it is intended to overcome.' Documents seen by The Telegraph show the guidance, first issued in 2019, is copied word for word in 'hiring instructions' sent to academics involved in recruitment processes at the university. The framework advises academics that recruitment panels should not be made up entirely of 'white males' or 'people with a particular career track record'. It reads: 'Conduct the shortlisting with more than one person on the panel, ideally forming the panel that is diverse both in gender and race if possible. 'Research shows that when the final applicant pool has only one minority candidate, they are unlikely to be offered the position: try to ensure that more than one candidate from under-represented groups is invited to [the] interview stage. 'If the longlist is not diverse, you do not have to appoint someone immediately, consider readvertising the position to encourage a more diverse shortlist.' Elsewhere, it says all members of recruitment panels 'must have completed the online University modules on E&D [equality and diversity] and Understanding Unconscious Bias'. Those involved in hiring decisions are also told to 'reflect' on the university's EDI commitments, 'their own biases' and the potential for 'implicit bias' before interviews and after selecting a favoured candidate. A source familiar with the workings of Cambridge's EDI committee said members were told 'don't worry about it' when they raised questions about the policies' legality. The source said: 'I joined the committee, wanting to see what was actually going on and maybe prevent things from going off the rails. 'When I got there, I discovered it was already off the rails.' The source added: 'If you criticise it, you're just seen as a bad person.' They went on to claim they had witnessed colleagues from non-underrepresented backgrounds – such as white people and men – being actively discouraged from applying to positions because of their race or sex. A spokesman for Cambridge denied that applicants were told this, saying it was 'not a view held by the university, relevant committees or senior management and is directly prohibited in law and our own policies'. Prof David Abulafia, the professor emeritus of Mediterranean history at the University of Cambridge, said the guidance was 'arrant nonsense'. He said: 'The sheer fanaticism of the bureaucracy at Cambridge and the craven submission of academics to their arrant nonsense spells the end of a once great university.' Prof John Marenbon, the philosopher and fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, added: 'Academic appointments should be made solely on the basis of academic merit. Academics who do otherwise betray their calling.' The university's EDI 'plan for action' includes a target to increase ethnic minority applications to 'academic and research posts to 8 per cent or higher' and 'for professional services roles to 30 per cent'. A spokesman for the University of Cambridge said: 'Every candidate is recruited based on merit. We have no quotas for staff recruitment and strongly refute claims of discriminating against white and male job applicants 'Our 'diverse recruitment framework' is a guidance document aimed at ensuring that all suitably qualified candidates are encouraged to apply for roles at Cambridge – not to dictate the outcome of recruitment. 'Use of this guidance, including training recommendations, is not mandated in our recruitment policy.'
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Letting banks loose is back on the agenda as UK politicians chase growth at any cost
As the old ways of turning a profit become more difficult – from assembling cars to selling soap powder – politicians of all stripes want the City to inject some dynamism into the economy. From Labour to Reform, the siren call of London's financial district is strong. If only, they ask, the wheels of the banking industry could be cranked to spin faster, surely much more money could be generated and we would all be rich. While Rachel Reeves boasted of the huge benefit to economic growth from public investments in rail and renewable energy as central pillars of the government's spending review, in truth it is not enough to propel the economy forward. To generate the kind of income that will pay for the next 30 years of an ageing society, plans to link Manchester and Liverpool by a marginally faster and more reliable train, though good in itself, is not the answer. The Treasury knows it is just an upgrade to existing services and will deliver only incremental returns. To turbocharge growth, the chancellor wants private money to take the lead, partnering government to share the burden of building bridges and tunnels and spurring investments in whizzy new ventures. And as a start, the Treasury wants the shackles taken off the bankers so they can become more inventive in the way they make money, taking risks that were previously frowned upon, if not banned, and rewarding themselves accordingly. It is 18 years since Northern Rock's high-risk mortgage lending began to unravel and 17 years since Lehman Brothers went bust. Long enough, it seems, for memories to fade, and with them concerns about the damaging consequences of light-touch regulation. That said, it's easy to see why the temptation to let the banks loose is back on the agenda. UK banks are among the most profitable in Europe and London plays host to the largest number of foreign banks. The UK's unicorn businesses – those privately held startup companies worth more than £1bn – rank in number behind only the US, India and China. Some startups are considered to be at the forefront of the financial technology boom, including Revolut and Monzo. What could be better for Britain than to leverage a fintech industry that already has a worldwide reputation? Revolut has championed handling funds invested in cryptocurrencies, and for this service, and its banking and wealth management, it has emerged as the most successful European fintech of the past decade. It was valued at $45bn last year. And there is no stopping the chief executive, co-founder and 25% owner, Nikolay Storonsky. He plans to expand into mortgages and consumer lending to challenge the major lenders, as well as growing in the US. Monzo is the digital bank best known for its coral pink debit cards. After 10 years, the company announced its first profit last year, of £15.4m, after more than doubling revenues to almost £900m. Reeves also wants pension funds to take more risks, which is a boon for an asset management industry that has fallen out of favour with the public in recent years due to its high charges and failure to deliver returns that better passive investments. Last week, the House of Lords financial services regulation committee gave Labour's mission a boost. It attacked the main City watchdogs – the Financial Conduct Authority and the Prudential Regulation Authority – for having 'a deeply entrenched culture of risk aversion'. In a report that the Treasury will have privately welcomed, the committee said the regulators were partly to blame for holding back economic growth. If the FCA and PRA, which have already pledged to reduce the paperwork and oversight of the City, become more trusting of its ability to manage risk, there is likely to be a sugar rush of activity, much as there was during the noughties. Labour has helped get the ball rolling by lifting the bankers' bonus cap, to allow publicly listed banks to join the bonanza of rewards enjoyed by executives in Revolut and Monzo. Monzo may have made only £15.4m profit but this modest sum was not to be re-invested. It was enough to warrant big payouts, including a £12m bag of cash and shares that Reuters said most likely went to the chief executive, TS Anil. Underscoring how light-touch regulation is matched by executive pay bonanzas, a report last month by the jobs website eFinancialCareers found that bonuses in the UK's investment banks had risen by 26% year on year, beating their equivalents in Asia, Europe and the US. The average bonus payout for a City executive was about £110,000. And the trickle-down effect works in finance. At junior levels, bonuses increased by as much as 133%, the survey found. Labour's backbench MPs know how this play ends. After all the partying and profit-making, there will be a severe hangover. And when that happens, the taxpayer is asked to save the day. Somehow, the profits of the financial sector belong to the bosses and the losses belong to the people.
