The coming of the autumn means it is party conference season.
MPs leave Westminster, with each of the parties descending on a city or town alongside their party faithful and the media for days of speeches, fringe events, networking and, quite often, drama.
These gatherings are ostensibly to hammer out policy, set the party’s agenda and present a united front to voters, but they don’t always go according to plan.
For prime ministers and party leaders, party conferences can often make or break their careers.
So ahead of this year’s gatherings, we take a look at some previous conference moments that have made headlines.
Join Sky News for this year’s conferences: Liberal Democrats: 23 – 26 September Conservatives: 1 – 4 October Labour: 8 – 11 October SNP: 15 – 17 October
Politics Hub with Sophy Ridge
Sky News Monday to Thursday at 7pm.
Watch live on Sky channel 501, Freeview 233, Virgin 602, the Sky News website and app or YouTube.
Around 18 months into her premiership, Margaret Thatcher was facing a tough economic picture. Unemployment was rising, and there were rumblings within her own party about the direction the prime minister was taking.
Mrs Thatcher had begun changing the law around trade unions, and introduced the legislation to let people buy their own council homes. Privatisation had begun.
Advertisement
The UK’s first female leader remained defiant, telling the assembled party faithful in Brighton: “To those waiting with bated breath for that favourite media catchphrase, the U-turn, I have only one thing to say – you turn if you want to. The lady’s not for turning.”
Mrs Thatcher did indeed carry on with her economic plan, with unemployment beginning to fall after peaking at three million.
She would solidify her leadership with a victory in the Falklands War and went on to win two more elections, serving as PM until 1990.
Image: Margaret Thatcher speaking at the 1980 Conservative Party Conference
1981: David Steel tells Liberal activists to ‘go back to your constituencies and prepare for government’
Just a year after Mrs Thatcher told her party how she felt about changing tack, Liberal leader David Steel sought to inspire confidence in his activists.
The conference in Llandudno saw the party vote to adopt its alliance with the Social Democratic Party, endorsing a partnership that would precipitate the eventual creation of today’s Liberal Democrats.
Headwinds for the government and a strong by-election performance saw incredibly optimistic polling for the Liberals, and Mr Steel was clearly confident in his party’s chances.
It was on that note that he told those gathered on the shores of the Irish Sea: “Go back to your constituencies and prepare for government”.
The boost of the successful campaign in the Falklands and an economic swing from recession to growth buoyed the Conservatives in 1983 – with the SDP-Liberal Alliance winning only 23 seats in total.
It would be 29 years before any Liberal Democrat MPs were vindicated in preparing for government during a general election campaign, when they entered a coalition with the Tories in 2010.
Image: Liberal Leader David Steel (left)
1984: IRA bombing
A year after Mrs Thatcher’s landslide 1983 election victory, the Conservative Party conference in Brighton was marred by tragedy.
A month before the conference got under way, IRA member Patrick Magee booked into the hotel where the PM would be staying and planted a bomb with a long delay fuse under the bath in his room.
As the clocks swept past 2.30am on 12 October, Mrs Thatcher was in her room at The Grand Hotel, going over the speech she was set to give the next day.
At 2.54am, Magee’s bomb exploded, destroying a number of rooms and bringing down a chimney stack.
Mrs Thatcher and her husband, Denis, survived – as did all the members of the cabinet. But five others – including deputy chief whip Sir Anthony Berry – died.
The conference went ahead, with Mrs Thatcher telling delegates: “This government will not weaken. This nation will meet that challenge. Democracy will prevail.”
Magee was given eight life sentences in 1986, but was released under the Good Friday Agreement in 1999.
Image: The destroyed hotel in Brighton
1985: Neil Kinnock’s Militant Tendency speech
Six years and two election losses into Mrs Thatcher’s premiership, Labour was floundering in opposition.
Neil Kinnock was the man tasked with bringing the party back into government after the 1983 election wipeout under Michael Foot.
The goal he set himself at the Bournemouth gathering in 1985 was to make clear to the more radical parts of Labour that they were not welcome in his plans for the party.
The leader would have been hoping to avoid the embarrassment of 1983, when he fell over on a beach in Brighton.
He used his speech to a tempestuous conference to single out Liverpool City Council, which was controlled by members of the Militant faction of Labour.
The council had set an illegal budget which spent more than the local authority made, claiming that the central government under Mrs Thatcher should fill the shortfall. This was done to protest against the limits to the money the council could raise.
The financial difficulties this caused led to the council sending notice letters to 30,000 employees.
Criticising the left-wing of his party, Mr Kinnock said: “I’ll tell you what happens with impossible promises. You start with far-fetched resolutions.
“They are then pickled into a rigid dogma, a code, and you go through the years sticking to that, out-dated, misplaced, irrelevant to the real needs, and you end up in the grotesque chaos of a Labour council hiring taxis to scuttle round a city handing out redundancy notices to its own workers.”
These words were met with applause and cheers from most of the crowd, but some booed and walked out, including MP Eric Heffer. Derek Hatton, the deputy leader of Liverpool City Council, said Mr Kinnock’s words were “rantings and ravings”.
Image: Neil Kinnock in 1985
2003: IDS ‘turns up the volume’
Sir Iain Duncan Smith had been leader of the Conservative Party for two years when he stood up to deliver his speech in Blackpool, but he was facing rumblings of rebellion within his own ranks as MPs and members grew disheartened.
So he decided to go on the front foot.
The previous year, Sir Iain had told the audience his opponents should not underestimate “the determination of a quiet man”.
He played off this riff, stating that the “quiet man is here to stay, and he’s turning up the volume”. Sir Iain told his party that they “either want my mission, or you want Tony Blair – there is no third way”.
But after a poor set of local election results later in the year, Sir Iain lost a vote of no confidence of his MPs and was out as leader.
Image: Iain Duncan Smith at the 2003 Conservative Party Conference
Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips
Watch live each week on Sunday at 8:30am on Sky channel 501, Freeview 233, Virgin 602, the Sky News website and app or YouTube.
2005: Labour activist removed from hall for heckling foreign secretary
By 2005, the New Labour project was past its zenith. While Sir Tony Blair had won his third election, he had committed to not contesting a fourth.
The government was having to fight a rearguard action in the UK following the invasion of Iraq.
Opposition from within the party was coalescing around those who were also part of groups like the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and the Stop The War Coalition.
It was not surprising, then, that disunity within Labour became one of the themes of the Brighton conference.
Jack Straw, then the foreign secretary, was giving a speech about the Iraq war. He told delegates that “we are in Iraq for one reason only – to help the elected Iraqi government build a secure, democratic and stable nation – and we can and will only remain with their consent.”
As he uttered the line, 82-year-old veteran Labour member Walter Wolfgang shouted “nonsense” – and according to some reports, “that’s a lie”.
As cameras panned towards the octogenarian – who had been a member of the party for more than 50 years – security could be seen manhandling Mr Wolfgang out of the conference hall.
He was later ejected from the conference as a whole, and when he tried to get back into summit he was held – but not arrested – using anti-terror laws.
The subsequent furore lead to a number of apologies, including from Sir Tony the next morning, and Mr Wolfgang being allowed to re-enter the conference the next day.
A founding member of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Mr Wolfgang arrived in the UK just before the Second World War as his family fled the persecutions of Jews in Europe.
His treatment drew criticism from many parts of Labour, and he was greeted with a standing ovation when he returned to the conference hall.
Mr Wolfgang died in 2019.
Image: Walter Wolfgang was eventually allowed back into the conference
2007: George Osborne increases inheritance tax threshold
By now, Gordon Brown was prime minister. After years of tensions behind the scenes with Sir Tony, the latter had finally decided to stand aside. Mr Brown was elected unopposed as Labour Party leader, becoming PM in the process.
Having taken over in June, he was riding a wave of popularity heading into the conference. Mr Brown was judged to have deftly handled a foot and mouth outbreak, the run on Northern Rock, terrorist incidents and flooding.
In the midst of this honeymoon period, speculation grew about the possibility of Mr Brown seeking to capitalise on this and call an election to gain a mandate from voters.
Labour’s conference became dominated by the nascent vote, with people wondering when it would happen, not if.
There was no mention of an election in Mr Brown’s first conference speech as leader, meaning the speculation around a snap poll continued to rumble on as the Conservatives gathered for their conference in Blackpool.
Shadow chancellor George Osborne used his speech to announce a major policy shift that generated positive headlines, pledging to scrap inheritance tax for bequeathments under £1m.
A few days later, Mr Brown ended election speculation by confirming he would not go to the country. He denied being swayed by polling which suggested the Tories were ahead in marginal seats, while the Tories accused him of bottling it.
Image: Gordon Brown’s enemies took advantage of his ‘bottling’
2017: Theresa May’s disastrous speech
One prime minister who did call a snap election after taking over was Theresa May.
But Mrs May’s gamble backfired spectacularly – she lost her party’s majority and was forced to rely on the Democratic Unionist Party to pass legislation through a confidence and supply deal.
Mrs May managed to hang on to her job, although she needed a drama-free party conference to keep things on track as she tried to negotiate Brexit.
But things did not go according to plan during her speech.
First off, a persistent cough dogged her attempts at oratory; attendees were quick to rise to their feet in applause to give their leader a break. At one point, Chancellor Philip Hammond offered up a cough sweet. Mrs May also swigged water throughout.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:16
Watch Tory conference literally falling apart
Secondly, comedian Simon Brodkin interrupted Mrs May’s speech to hand her a P45 – the document someone gets when they leave a job. The mock document gave the reasons for Mrs May leaving office as “neither strong nor stable”, and “we’re a bit worried about Jezza”. Mr Brodkin joked that Boris Johnson had told him to do it.
The final disaster was with the backdrop of the speech. Letters behind Mrs May said: “Building a country that works for everyone”.
During the speech, the “f” fell off, with an “e” dropping later.
It was a disastrous affair all round, and emboldened the opposition to Mrs May within her own party.
The following year, Mrs May sought to head off similar conversations by dancing her way onto the stage, but her moves were labelled robotic and awkward by critics.
Image: Theresa May struggled through her speech in 2017
2021: Starmer heckled by Labour activists
Following the disruption of COVID in 2020, autumn 2021 marked Sir Keir Starmer’s first chance to address a Labour Party conference in person.
But as he was giving his speech, several people heckled him from the floor of the auditorium.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:48
Starmer heckled at Labour conference
One notable heckler was Carole Vincent, a former contestant on Big Brother. She could be seen shouting and pointing at Sir Keir.
In response, he said: “Shouting slogans or changing lives, conference?”, to a standing ovation.
Another audience contribution saw Sir Keir say he was used to being heckled by the Conservatives at PMQs on a Wednesday, but “it doesn’t bother me then, it doesn’t bother me now”.
Ms Vincent told Sky News her intervention was about “standing up in a principled manner against what he was saying, because he wasn’t saying ‘we are going to give a Ā£15 minimum wage’.”
Image: Carole Vincent was one of the people who heckled Sir Keir Starmer
2022: Kwasi Kwarteng U-turns on cutting top rate of income tax
There were not many quiet days while Liz Truss and Kwasi Kwarteng were in charge of the country – the Conservative Party conference in Birmingham was no different.
The pair went into October’s conference battling a potential collapse of the pensions sector as markets baulked at their mini-budget. The cornerstone of that fiscal plan was tax cuts funded by borrowing, which some classed as “unfunded”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:00
Moment chancellor U-turns on tax rate
A lightning rod for those displeased with the mini-budget was a plan to abolish the top rate of income tax set at 45p in the pound for those making more than £150,000. It was seen as giving a tax cut to wealthier people at the expense of others.
As the conference started – just a week after the mini-budget – Ms Truss and Mr Kwarteng were both staunchly defending the plans.
But there was open mutiny among Tory MPs. In the early hours of the second day of conference, it started to emerge that a U-turn was imminent – and the scrapping of the 45p tax rate was ditched later on that morning.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
Just hours later, Mr Kwarteng stood up to deliver his speech to conference, in which he had to defend the gutting of his mini-budget. He claimed the leadership had “listened” and therefore changed tack. Ms Truss said similar in her address.
The events at the conference marked the beginning of the end for the duo. Mr Kwarteng was sacked 11 days later, and Ms Truss announced she was following him out of Downing Street before October was out.
The two baronesses of the podcast finally lift the lid on the House of Lords in this special Q&A episode. What’s it really like on the red benches in parliament? And if you’re a Lord, are you a has-been?
Also – was Tony Blair actually cool in the 90s? Or was it just a more optimistic time in politics?
It was perhaps not quite how officials, in London at least, had envisaged the announcement of the state visit would be made.
In the Oval Office, Donald Trump revealed the news in his own way.
“I was invited by the King and the great country. They are going to do a second fest – that’s what it is. It is beautiful,” he said during an impromptu Oval Office moment.
Or was this actually just the smaller visit that had been offered two months ago as an initial bilateral visit at which the state visit would be discussed?
Back in February, Sir Keir Starmer presented the president with a letter from King Charles and the offer of a state visit.
The letter proposed an initial meeting between the King and the president to discuss details of the state visit at either Dumfries House or Balmoral, both in Scotland, close to Mr Trump’s golf clubs.
The King wrote: “Quite apart from this presenting an opportunity to discuss a wide range of issues of mutual interest, it would also offer a valuable chance to plan a historic second state visit to the United Kingdom⦠As you will know this is unprecedented by a US president. That is why I would find it helpful for us to be able to discuss, together, a range of options for location and programme content.”
As he revealed the news of his “fest” with his “friend Charles”, Mr Trump said: “I think they are setting a date for September⦔
Sources have since confirmed to Sky News that it will amount to the full state visit.
Image: Sir Keir Starmer handed Trump the invite earlier this year. Pic: Reuters
‘Even more important’
It’s possible the initial less formal presidential trip may still happen between now and September. Mr Trump is in Europe for the NATO summit in June and is due in Scotland to open a new golf course soon too.
“It is the second time it has happened to one person. The reason is we have two separate terms, and it’s an honour to be a friend of King Charles and the family, William,” the president said.
“I don’t know how it can be bigger than the last one. The last one was incredible, but they say the next one will be even more important.”
His last state visit in 2019, at the invitation of the late Queen, drew significant protests epitomised by the giant blow-up “Baby Trump” which floated over Parliament Square.
Image: The president was hosted by the Queen in June 2019. Pic: Reuters
Britain’s trump card
September is a little earlier than had been expected for the visit. It may be an advantage for it to happen sooner rather than later, given the profoundly consequential and controversial nature of the first few months of his second term.
The decision by the British government to play its “state visit trump card” up front back in February drew some criticism.
And since February, Mr Trump’s position on numerous issues has been increasingly at odds with all of America’s allies.
On Ukraine, he has seemingly aligned himself closely with Vladimir Putin. His tariffs have caused a global economic shock. And on issues like Greenland and Canada, a member of the Commonwealth, he has generated significant diplomatic shock.
A risk worth taking
Mr Trump is as divisive among the British public as he is in America. Sir Keir is already walking a political tightrope by choosing the softly softly approach with the White House.
Spreaker
This content is provided by Spreaker, which may be using cookies and other technologies.
To show you this content, we need your permission to use cookies.
You can use the buttons below to amend your preferences to enable Spreaker cookies or to allow those cookies just once.
You can change your settings at any time via the Privacy Options.
Unfortunately we have been unable to verify if you have consented to Spreaker cookies.
To view this content you can use the button below to allow Spreaker cookies for this session only.
The UK government chose not to retaliate against Mr Trump’s tariffs, unlike some allies. Sir Keir and his cabinet have been at pains not to be seen to criticise the president in any way as they seek to influence him on Ukraine and seek an elusive economic deal on tariffs.
On that tariff deal, despite some positive language from the US side and offers on the table, there has yet to be a breakthrough. A continuing challenge is engaging with the president for decisions and agreements only he, not his cabinet, will make.
British officials acknowledge the risk the state visit poses. In this presidency, anything could happen between now and September.
But they argue British soft power and Mr Trump’s fondness for the Royal Family and pomp – or a “fest” as he calls it – amount to vital diplomatic clout.
For a special relationship under strain, a special state visit is the tonic.
Laws may need to be strengthened to crack down on the exploitation of child “influencers”, a senior Labour MP has warned.
Chi Onwurah, chair of the science, technology and innovation committee, said parts of the Online Safety Act – passed in October 2023 – may already be “obsolete or inadequate”.
Experts have raised concerns that there is a lack of provision in industry laws for children who earn money through brand collaborations on social media when compared to child actors and models.
This has led to some children advertising in their underwear on social media, one expert has claimed.
Those working in more traditional entertainment fields are safeguarded by performance laws,which strictly govern the hours a minor can work, the money they earn and who they are accompanied by.
The Child Influencer Project, which has curated the world’s first industry guidelines for the group, has warned of a “large gap in UK law” which is not sufficiently filled by new online safety legislation.
Image: Official portrait of Chi Onwurah.
Pic: UK Parlimeant
The group’s research found that child influencers could be exposed to as many as 20 different risks of harm, including to dignity, identity, family life, education, and their health and safety.
Ms Onwurah told Sky News there needs to be a “much clearer understanding of the nature of child influencers ‘work’ and the legal and regulatory framework around it”.
She said: “The safety and welfare of children are at the heart of the Online Safety Act and rightly so.
“However, as we know in a number of areas the act may already be obsolete or inadequate due to the lack of foresight and rigour of the last government.”
Victoria Collins, the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for science, innovation and technology, agreed that regulations “need to keep pace with the times”, with child influencers on social media “protected in the same way” as child actors or models.
“Liberal Democrats would welcome steps to strengthen the Online Safety Act on this front,” she added.
‘Something has to be done’
MPs warned in 2022 that the government should “urgently address the gap in UK child labour and performance regulation that is leaving child influencers without protection”.
They asked for new laws on working hours and conditions, a mandate for the protection of the child’s earnings, a right to erasure and to bring child labour arrangements under the oversight of local authorities.
However, Dr Francis Rees, the principal investigator for the Child Influencer Project, told Sky News that even after the implementation of the Online Safety Act, “there’s still a lot wanting”.
“Something has to be done to make brands more aware of their own duty of care towards kids in this arena,” she said.
Dr Rees added that achieving performances from children on social media “can involve extremely coercive and disruptive practices”.
“We simply have to do more to protect these children who have very little say or understanding of what is really happening. Most are left without a voice and without a choice.”
What is a child influencer – and how are they at risk?
A child influencer is a person under the age of 18 who makes money through social media, whether that is using their image alone or with their family.
Dr Francis Rees, principal investigator for the Child Influencer Project, explains this is an āescalationā from the sharing of digital images and performances of the child into āsome form of commercial gain or brand endorsementā.
She said issues can emerge when young people work with brands – who do not have to comply with standard practise for a child influencer as they would with an in-house production.
Dr Rees explains how, when working with a child model or actor, an advertising agency would have to make sure a performance license is in place, and make sure āeverything is in accordance with many layers of legislation and regulation around child protectionā.
But, outside of a professional environment, these safeguards are not in place.
She notes that 30-second videos ācan take as long as three days to practice and rehearseā.
And, Dr Rees suggests, this can have a strain on the parent-child relationship.
āIt’s just not as simple as taking a child on to a set and having them perform to a camera which professionals are involved in.ā
The researcher pointed to one particular instance, in which children were advertising an underwear brand on social media.
She said: “The kids in the company’s own marketing material or their own media campaigns are either pulling up the band of the underwear underneath their clothing, or they’re holding the underwear up while they’re fully clothed.
“But whenever you look at any of the sponsored content produced by families with children – mum, dad, and child are in their underwear.”
Dr Rees said it is “night and day” in terms of how companies are behaving when they have responsibility for the material, versus “the lack of responsibility once they hand it over to parents with kids”.