Badenoch ‘increasingly' supportive of leaving ECHR, as she launches exit probe
The Conservative leader is expected to set out her plans for a commission about whether the UK should leave the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), a treaty which underpins human rights law, in a speech on Friday.
If international treaties, including the European Convention block us and there is no realistic prospect of changing them then, we leave them. No hesitation. No apology Kemi Badenoch
'I have always been clear that if our national interest means that we need to leave the ECHR, we will leave,' the Conservative leader will say.
She will add: 'But I say that not because of any particular obsession with international law or with our treaty arrangements. I say that because for me, the most important thing is making our country safer, richer and fairer.'
The ECHR was a dividing issue in last year's Conservative leadership election, with Mrs Badenoch's rival Robert Jenrick championing the idea that Britain should pull out.
Critics of the treaty want to leave it because they believe it has been used to frustrate attempts to deport migrants from Britain.
Mrs Badenoch has stopped short of calling for the UK to leave, but in February, she suggested that the UK would 'probably' have to withdraw from the convention if it stops the country from doing 'what is right'.
Now the Conservative leader will say she is 'increasingly of the view that we will need to leave, because I am yet to see a clear and coherent route to change within our current legal structures'.
But a 'clear plan' and 'full understanding' of the consequences of leaving are needed first, Mrs Badenoch will say as she announces a commission into the matter led by Lord Wolfson of Tredegar, the shadow attorney general.
Screen grab of Conservative party leader Kemi Badenoch speaking during Prime Minister's Questions in the House of Commons this week (Houses of Parliament)
Five 'common sense' questions will be asked by the investigation, branded a series of 'tests' by Mrs Badenoch.
These include whether the UK can 'lawfully remove foreign criminals and illegal migrants to their home country or elsewhere — even if they have family here or claim they could be at risk if sent home', and if the Government can stop veterans being 'pursued by vexatious legal attacks'.
The Commission will also look at whether British citizens receive preference ahead of migrants for 'scarce public services', if prison sentences 'actually reflect Parliament's intentions', and how to prevent 'endless legal challenges' to planning applications.
Mrs Badenoch will say that the 'system must change' if her investigation 'makes clear that these tests cannot be passed under the current system'.
She will add: 'If international treaties, including the European Convention, block us and there is no realistic prospect of changing them, then we leave them. No hesitation. No apology.'
The Conservative leader will set out whether she plans to leave the ECHR at the Tory conference in October, when the investigation will report back.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
The truth about the 1984 miners' strike
On 6 March 1984, I found myself smack-bang in the middle of the largest industrial dispute in post-war history. As the son of a fifth-generation miner whose bedroom window looked out onto Pye Hill Pit in Selston – the remote Nottinghamshire mining village I called home – I couldn't help but be caught up in the miners' strike. And over its 363 days, I watched with bemused anger as a series of nods, winks, slights of hand and outright lies were fashioned into a hard and fast history. On one side we had the National Union of Mineworkers' (NUM) principled president Arthur Scargill and the striking miners, fighting to save British mining. On the other side, Nottinghamshire's moneygrubbing scabs, intent on murdering Old King Coal – aided by Margaret Thatcher and the rozzers. Admittedly, the media didn't spell it out quite so plainly, but there were enough headlines and emotion-heavy images to make sure we all got the message.
Scotsman
2 hours ago
- Scotsman
Mainstreaming of far-right ideas in UK politics shows why John Swinney was right to raise alarm
Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... Received wisdom at Westminster has it that the far-right has never made it into UK politics. Coupled with that theory is then the debate by the same commentators around what constitutes the 'far-right'. However using the measurement of policies pursued, which is, after all, the very essence of a political movement or party, the far-right has most certainly arrived in UK politics. UK parties, across the political spectrum, now embrace the hardest of hard Brexit, unthinkable even in the aftermath of the referendum in June 2016, and a policy that has done untold damage to the economy and our rights. We also had a government that promoted the sending of asylum seekers to Rwanda and MPs who openly campaign on leaving the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which has underpinned our rights since the end of the Second World War. Were the UK to leave, it would be joining Russia and Belarus in doing so, hardly polite company. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Brexit, leaving the ECHR, and the Rwanda scheme are or were mainstream policy proposals in the UK yet they are policies that far-right parties elsewhere in Europe would baulk at. Even the hardest of hard-right parties in other parts of Europe such as the National Rally in France, the Vlaams Belaang in Belgium or Alternative fur Deutschland in Germany have abandoned plans to leave the EU, given the UK's Brexit debacle. John Swinney's stances on the EU, Donald Trump and migration, among others, have won plaudits (Picture: Jeff J Mitchell) | Getty Images An attack on justice Yet despite these policy failures, the mainstreaming of the far-right has become all too common in our politics along with their tactics. Over the past few days alone, Conservative Shadow Justice Secretary, Robert Jenrick, attacked the Labour Attorney General for doing his job and defending his clients. His remarks were described by former Conservative Attorney General Dominic Grieve 'as a direct attack on our principles of justice'. As we saw in this week's Hamilton by-election, we in Scotland are certainly not immune. Nigel Farage's attack on Anas Sarwar, which he doubled down on when challenged by the press, should act as a warning to us all. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Such remarks are unacceptable and whereas I may have legitimate policy differences with the Scottish Labour leader, they should have no place in our political discourse. For all the heat of the campaign in the run-up to what was a hard-fought by-election, it was good to see SNP and Labour leaders call out these disgraceful comments. Zia Yusuf's resignation as chair of Reform on Thursday and his concerns around Reform in the Commons should also act as a warning. Calling out bigotry That is why the First Minister was right to bring together colleagues from across the political spectrum in a summit seeking to 'lock out' Reform from Holyrood earlier this year. John Swinney is right to call out their policies and the 'bigotry' that they represent and to call out Farage as 'an accomplice of the Russian agenda'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Fair play to the politicians and representatives of civil society who put any political differences aside and joined the First Minister. That meeting was criticised at the time by the Conservatives and a range of commentators. Given Reform's tactics and language over the course of the by-election campaign, we have seen just how badly needed that stance was and remains. Labour will be pleased with Thursday's win, and I congratulate them on it, however, no party can afford to be complacent about Reform. One of the lessons from Hamilton must be that the key to taking on the far-right is to challenge them on their ideas. Nigel Farage's track record is not a particularly good one. He has been a driving force campaigning to leave the EU for decades. That was a decision that has exacerbated the cost-of-living crisis, removed rights from UK citizens, damaged business, especially small-to-medium enterprises (SMEs) and ultimately made us all poorer. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad He backed Donald Trump whose presidency has destabilised the world, seen tariffs introduced that have damaged the global economy, and undermined efforts to support Ukraine against Russian aggression. 'Island of Strangers' The Reform policy platform is weak. For their opponents, that should provide ample targets. Yet, in the Westminster bubble their policies are given far too much credibility. There is an omertà around discussing the glaring failure of the Brexit experiment and the less said about Keir Starmer's 'Island of Strangers' speech on migration frankly the better. John Swinney would be the first to admit that the Scottish Government haven't got everything right. However, on the big calls around our relationship with the EU, the impact of Donald Trump's presidency, migration, child poverty and the rights we should enjoy as citizens, the SNP leader has maintained credibility for his stances, winning plaudits at Westminster and further afield. Politics is about ideas and Reform's are simply not good ones. The Conservatives and Reform are increasingly aligning on a range of policies and a pact or even merger is not out of the question. This is to be expected, given that Reform draws its politicians and many voters from the Conservatives. They have, in turn, turned their backs on One Nation conservatism, and instead the party is dominated by the Johnson/Truss populist wing, which is not so different from Farage and Reform. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad This week's by-election and the preceding campaign must act as a wake-up call. During the run-up to the Holyrood elections, there is an opportunity for all parties to set out their vision for Scotland. On the one hand, there is an inclusive, outward-looking and internationalist vision represented by John Swinney, on the other is Reform's inward and exclusive offering. I know which one I'm backing.
New Statesman
2 hours ago
- New Statesman
Bruce Springsteen faces the end of America
Photo montage by Gaetan Mariage / Alamy When I met Patti Smith soon after Donald Trump's first victory, she said she'd ended up next to him at various New York dinners over the years, back in the Seventies, when he was pitching Trump Towers. 'We were born in the same year, and I have to look at this person and think: all our hopes and dreams from childhood, going through the Sixties, everything we went through – and that's what came out of our generation. Him.' Smith's sing-song voice was in my head at Anfield Stadium in Liverpool on one of the final nights of Bruce Springsteen's Land of Hope and Dreams tour. Springsteen was born three years after Trump and will also have sat at many New York dinners with him. Those with half an eye on the news would be forgiven for thinking that Bruce has been lobbing disses at the president from the stage between his hits, but his latest show is heavier than that: a conscious recasting of two decades of his more politicised music, with a four-minute incitement to revolution in the middle. Here is a bit of what he says: 'The America I love and have sung to you about for so long, a beacon of hope for 250 years, is currently in the hands of a corrupt, incompetent and treasonous administration. Tonight we ask all of you who believe in democracy and the best of our American experiment to rise with us, raise your voices, stand with us against authoritarianism and let freedom ring. In America right now we have to organise at home, at work, peacefully in the street. We thank the British people for their support…' Clearly few in the US are speaking out like this on stage, and Trump has responded by calling Springsteen a 'dried-out prune of a rocker (his skin is all atrophied!)' and threatening some kind of mysterious action upon his return. Springsteen, the heartland rocker, was never exactly part of the counter-culture, though he did avoid Vietnam by doing the 'basic Sixties rag', as he put it, and acting crazy in his army induction. Yet he has become a true protest singer in his final act. He wears tweed and a tie these days, partly because he's 75 and partly, you suspect, to convey a moral seriousness. When I last saw him, two years ago, I thought I saw some of Joe Biden's easy energy. Well, Bruce still has his faculties. The feeling is: listen to the old man, he has something to say. Springsteen's late years have been something to behold. At some point in the last decade he stopped dyeing his hair and started to talk in a stylised, reedy, story-book voice. The image of the America he seemed to represent shifted back from Seventies Pittsburgh to Thirties California: the bare-armed steelworker became the Marlboro Man, and in 2019 there was a Cowboy album, Western Skies, with an accompanying film in which he was seen on horseback. His autobiography Born to Run revealed recent battles with depression. And it is depression you see tonight in Liverpool – in the wince, the twisted mouth, the accusing index finger; in his entreaty to Liverpool's fans to 'indulge' his sermon against the American administration, delivered night after night, to scatterings of applause. It is a depression I recognise in older American friends who fear they're going to the grave with everything they knew and loved about their country disappearing. But depression is also the stuff of life, of energy. Springsteen has been particularly angry since the early Noughties, since the second Bush administration, but this is his moment somehow, and his song of greedy bankers – 'Death to My Hometown' – is spat out with new meaning in 2025, an ominous abstraction. The father-to-son speech in 'Long Walk Home' feels different in this politically charged world: 'Your flag flying over the courthouse means certain things are set in stone/Who we are, what we'll do and what we won't'). A furious version of 'Rainmaker' ('Sometimes folks need to believe in something so bad, so bad, they'll hire a rainmaker') is dedicated to 'our dear leader'. As much as I admire Springsteen and seem to have followed him around and written about him for years, the Land of Hope and Dreams tour made me realise I hadn't fully known what he was for. When I saw him in Hyde Park in 2023, the first 200 yards of the crowd were given over to media wankers like me, with the paying fans at the back: every single person I had ever met in London was there, mildly pissed up and whirling about with looks of mutual congratulation. Springsteen had become, to the middle classes and above, a global symbol of right-thinking, summed up by his long stint on Broadway at $800 a ticket. His dull podcast with Barack Obama was the American version of The Rest Is Politics with Rory Stewart and Alastair Campbell: men saying stuff you want them to say, to confirm what you already think about stuff (Obama was in awe of Bruce). Subscribe to The New Statesman today from only £8.99 per month Subscribe Politics was easy for Springsteen when politics consisted of external events happening to innocent people, rather than something taking place on the level of psychology, in a movement of masses towards a demagogue. The job he adopted, back in the Seventies, was to set a particular kind of American life in its political and historical context: to tell people who they were, and why they mattered. His appeal as a rock star always lay less in his words than in how sincerely he embodied them: his extraordinary outward energy, his mirroring of his audience, his apparent concern with others over himself. After 9/11, someone apparently rolled down a window and told him, 'We need you now,' so he wrote his song 'The Rising' from the viewpoint of a doomed New York fireman ascending the tower. A recent BBC documentary revealed he'd donated £20,000 to the Northumberland and Durham Miners Support Group during the strikes of 1984 – rather as he donated ten grand to unemployed steelworkers in Pittsburgh the previous year. His self-made success and songs about freedom were the Republican dream, but when Reagan tapped him up for endorsements it was a right of passage for Springsteen as a Democrat rocker to rebuff them (I'm pretty sure they tried to play 'Born in the USA' at Trump rallies too). He is quoted as saying that the working-class American was facing a spiritual crisis, years ago: 'It's like he has nothing left to tie him into society any more. He's isolated from the government. Isolated from his job. Isolated from his family… to the point where nothing makes sense.' Now, Trump has taken Springsteen's people (the Republicans were doing so long before Trump), and the interior life of the working man that Springsteen made it his job to portray has been exploited by someone else. 'For 50 years, I've been an ambassador for this country and let me tell you that the America I was singing about is real,' he says, possessively, on stage. Springsteen, like Jon Bon Jovi, sees his fans as workers. The distances travelled, the money spent, the babysitters paid for: that's what the three-hour gigs are all about. It is part of the psyche of a certain generation of working-class American musician to consider themselves in a contract with the people who buy their records. It is not a particularly British thing – though time and again I am impressed by the commitment required to see these big shows, especially when so many punters are of an age where they would not longer, say, sleep in a tent: £250 a night for a hotel, no taxis to the stadium, a huge Ticketmaster crash that leaves hundreds of fans outside the venue fiddling with their QR codes while Bruce can be heard inside singing the opening lines of 'My Love Will Not Let You Down'. Yet the relationship between a rock star and his fan is not a co-dependency: the fan is having a night out, but the rock star needs the fan to survive. It is hard to underestimate the psychological shift Springsteen might be undergoing, in seeing the working men and women of America moving to a politics that is repellent to him. He has not played on American soil since Trump's re-election and it is likely that this kind of political commentary there will turn the 'Bruuuuuce' into the boo. A Springsteen tribute act in his native New Jersey was recently cancelled (the band offered to play other songs, and the venue said no). Last week, a young American band told me they won't speak out about the administration on stage because they're not all white and they're afraid of getting deported. It is the job of the powerful to do the protesting, and, like Pope Leo, Springsteen's previous good works will mean nothing if he doesn't call out the big nude emperor now. The Maga crowd will still come to see him, of course, and yell the 'woah' in 'Born to Run' just as loud as everyone else does – perhaps because music is bigger than politics, or perhaps because politics is now bigger than Bruce. Though his political speeches in Liverpool (it's UK 'heartland' only this tour: no London gigs) feel slightly out of step with a city that has its own problems, it seems fair enough for Springsteen to be telling the truth about America to a crowd who's enjoyed their romantic visions of the country via his music for 50 years. But their own personal communion is suspended tonight, and the song 'My City of Ruins' has nothing to do with 9/11 any more: 'Come on… rise up…' In the crowd, a very old man is sitting on someone's shoulders. Bruce Springsteen and the E Street Band play Anfield stadium, Liverpool, on 7 June 2025 [See also: Wes Anderson's sense of an ending] Related
