Adam Boulton: Do the Conservatives have a death wish?

Published

2 years ago

January 21, 2024

admin

Isaac Levido, the man in charge of the Conservative general election campaign, did not hold back.

“Let me be clear,” he briefed Tory MPs at a closed-door meeting last Monday: “Divided parties fail”. A fat lot of good that did the prime minister.

The next day, 60 Conservative MPs voted, fruitlessly, for an amendment in defiance of the government’s bill to keep the proposed Rwanda removal scheme broadly compliant with the law.

Politics latest: Tax cuts hint dropped by Rishi Sunak

The rebels included former home secretary Suella Braverman, her deputy Robert Jenrick and three resigners from payroll jobs, including Lee Anderson, the loud-mouthed party deputy chairman.

The revolt shrunk at the substantive “third reading” on Wednesday.

More than 40 of them caucused before the vote and pulled back from bringing down the bill, and probably themselves and the government with it. Only 11 rebelled.

Still, it was a stretch for the prime minister to boast “the Conservative Party has come together” at a specially convened news conference the following day.

Sources informed Sky’s political editor Beth Rigby that several “letters had gone in” from Tory MPs demanding a vote of no confidence in Sunak.

Such behaviour prompts the question: “Do the Conservatives have a death wish as a party of government?” To put it another way: “Do they sincerely want to win the next election?”

The public notices when a party is divided. The latest figures for December are Conservatives divided 70%, united 8%.

The polling company YouGov runs a survey tracking that issue for the Conservatives. The jaws of disillusionment sprung wide in January 2022, the height of the “partygate” revelations, and have stayed gaping wide ever since.

Labour’s large lead in the opinion polls has also been in place for the past two years.

Two YouGov polls in the past week suggest that, if anything, it is getting bigger.

A large survey in key constituencies, commissioned by a newly formed right-wing faction calling itself the Conservative Britain Alliance, plotted the party on course to lose 196 seats, down to just 169 MPs to Labour’s 385.

Next the regular monthly poll for The Times, conducted this week, gave Labour an increased lead of 27 points in voting intention, 47% to 20%, with Nigel Farage’s Reform in third place on 12%.

In such dire circumstances, the prime minister at least is now sticking to Isaac Levido’s advice and claiming that the Conservatives are united.

He is only managing to keep them together by constantly shifting closer to the position of the rebels on the right. He has declined to punish, or remove the party whip, from those who voted against the government on the Rwanda bill.

Instead, Sunak confirmed this week that he will order civil servants to ignore last-minute, so-called “pyjama orders” from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) under Rule 39, to halt deportations.

He and his ministers have adopted the nativist rhetoric of describing the ECHR as a “foreign court”. The UK has been a founder member of the international court since 1959 and a Briton sits as one of its judges. It is not an EU institution.

Some of the rebels are veterans of the post-referendum Brexit deliberations which brought down Theresa May. Whatever moves she made in their direction were never enough.

Others, like Lee Anderson, were elected in 2019 on Boris Johnson’s coattails. Bathetically Anderson abstained in the final vote because he couldn’t stand the mockery from Labour when he entered the “nay” voting lobby.

That was a momentary weakness. The rebels have no interest in compromise and are already pressing for the UK to withdraw from the ECHR come what may, placing this nation alongside Russia and Belarus in Europe.

The prime minister claims that his Rwanda plan is the “will of the people”. It was not in the Conservative Party’s manifesto in 2019, although Boris Johnson subsequently floated the idea.

A majority of the general public, 53%, say it wouldn’t “be effective”. 40% want it abandoned, compared to 37% who say press ahead.

The cross-Channel migrants are a dramatic manifestation of people coming into the UK but are only a fraction of the record net total, over 600,000 a year, currently coming into the UK.

By common admission the number who would be sent to Rwanda, if the scheme were established, is smaller still. Sunak’s “Stop the Boats” policy is almost a diversion from the complex issues raised by mass migration.

Sunak is drawing attention to Labour saying it would scrap the Rwanda scheme “even if it was working”. He is continuing to tell voters that Labour has no plan, whatever policy they develop. As yet this does not seem to be damaging either Starmer or his party.

But 46% of Conservatives voters in 2019 said the Rwanda scheme would be effective, even more of them, 63%, want the government to continue with the policy.

In truth, Sunak appears more concerned with keeping the majority of his electoral base together than delivering “the will of the people”.

Click to subscribe to Politics at Jack and Sam’s wherever you get your podcasts

Immigration is a major concern for some voters, but all categories and classes say the economy and cost of living matter more to them.

Here again, Conservative MPs are divided and feuding among themselves, with constant demands that the prime minister and Chancellor Jeremy Hunt go further with tax cuts than they feel the country can afford.

The Budget on 6 March will be a test of whether they resist or succumb to this pressure.

Many Tory MPs think their “narrow path” to election victory is all but disappearing. As such winning has ceased to be a priority. They are more interested in what happens to their party and their own careers after a defeat.

At least 54 of them have given up and are retiring. Those shouting loudest about the threat from Reform want to drive party policy in Farage’s direction.

Farage appears to be more popular than Sunak with the ageing party membership who will choose the next Conservative leader but he is not eligible to stand.

Braverman, Jenrick, Badenoch and others are already positioning themselves for the vacancy which they think defeat will create.

Those on the other, One Nation, side of the party, and who managed to survive the Johnson era purges, are loyal but out of sympathy with the direction in which it is moving. They do not expect to win the next election.

Some feel that the Conservatives will need to elect another extremist as leader, and lose again, before they can “get their party back ” – as Labour’s Neil Kinnock once put it.

Interestingly, the new roster of Conservative MPs is likely to be more moderate, given the preponderance of centrist new candidates now being selected, coupled with the likely defeat of many “red wall” Tories.

Sunak is hoping to stay in power at least until the autumn. Before then the Conservatives face parliamentary by-elections in Wellingborough and Kingswood and probably Blackpool North.

All will be tough to hold on to the party’s recent electoral form. Then there are the local elections in London and elsewhere. Such tests are as likely to divide as unite his party behind him.

Something may turn up. Labour needs a record swing to form a majority government and nobody, least of all Keir Starmer and his team, expect they will do as well on election day as in current opinion polls.

Still, as things stand, Issac Levido’s warning and the Conservatives’ dismissive reaction to it, may well be written into a chronicle of a political death foretold.

UK

‘I’m deprived of my UK citizenship but I’m not a convicted terrorist’

Published

4 hours ago

August 24, 2025

admin

'I'm deprived of my UK citizenship but I'm not a convicted terrorist'

Hayat Tahrir al Sham (HTS) went from a jihadist movement once aligned to al Qaeda to forming the official government of Syria.

It was a monumental transformation for them, their country and the wider Middle East.

But potentially too for British people who went to Syria – and who were stripped of their citizenship as a result, on the grounds of national security.

Tauqir Sharif, better known as Tox, went to Syria in 2012 as an aid worker. He was accused of being part of a group affiliated with al Qaeda, which he denies, and the then-home secretary Amber Rudd deprived him of his British citizenship in 2017.

“As of now, I am deprived of my UK citizenship but I’m not a convicted terrorist – and the reason for that is because we refused, we boycotted, the SIAC [Special Immigration Appeals Commission] secret courts, which don’t allow you to see any of the evidence presented against you,” he said.

“And one of the things that I always called for was, look, put me in front of a jury, let’s have an open hearing.”

HTS is still a proscribed terrorist organisation but the British government has now established relations with it.

Foreign Secretary David Lammy travelled to Damascus to meet the jihadist-turned-Syrian interim president – the man who swapped his nom de guerre of al Jolani for Ahmed al Sharaa.

If the UK government takes HTS off the terror list, what does that mean for those who lost their citizenship after being accused of being part of it?

People who joined HTS are only a subset among the scores of people who have had their citizenship revoked – a tool the UK government has been quick to use.

According to a report by the Parliamentary Joint Human Rights Committee, the UK “uses deprivation of citizenship orders more than almost any country in the world”.

The peak of that was in 2017, and mainly in relation to Syria – especially in the case of people joining Islamic State, perhaps most famously Shamima Begum.

And because people cannot be made entirely stateless, and need to have a second nationality, or be potentially eligible for one, there are worries of racism in who the orders apply to.

Countries like Pakistan and Bangladesh offer dual nationality, whereas other nations do not. In 2022, the Institute of Race Relations said “the vast majority of those deprived are Muslim men with South Asian or Middle Eastern/North African heritage”.

Legal grey areas

Sky News submitted Freedom of Information requests to the Home Office asking for a breakdown of second nationalities of those deprived of citizenship, but was refused twice on national security grounds.

The independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, told Sky News there are issues around transparency.

“I do think there is a problem when you have people whose relationship with the country that they’re left with is really technical and they may never have realised that they had that citizenship before and may never gone to that country,” he said.

“Me and my predecessors have all said, owing to how frequently this power is used, it should be something that the independent reviewer should have the power to review. I asked, my predecessor asked, we’ve both been told no, so I agree there’s a lack of transparency.”

No automatic reversal

Even if the government does remove HTS from the terror list, it would not automatically invalidate decisions to deprive people of their citizenship.

Macer Gifford gave up a career as a banker in London to join the Kurdish People’s Protection Units (YPG) as a foreign volunteer between 2015 and 2017.

He told Sky News that decisions “made years ago in the interest of the British public have to remain”.

“We can’t sort of go through previous cases nitpicking through it, wasting time and money to bring it up to date,” he added.

“We can’t be naive because the intent to go out, the decision to go in itself is a huge decision for them. So it shows commitment when they’re there, they then, if they take an active participation in the organisations that they’ve been accused of joining, again, that involves training and perseverance and dedication to the cause.”

But those born and raised in Britain, who joined the same cause, and lost their citizenship as a result, might reasonably ask why that should remain the case.

UK

Criminals could be banned from pubs and sports grounds under new plans

Published

4 hours ago

August 24, 2025

admin

Criminals could be banned from pubs and sports grounds under new plans

Criminals face being banned from pubs, sports grounds and concerts under new government plans to give judges powers to pass tougher community sentences.

The new measures, which would apply to people in England and Wales, “should remind all offenders that, under this government, crime does not pay”, Justice Secretary Shabana Mahmood said.

Offenders’ freedom could also be curtailed with limits on driving, travel bans and restriction zones confining them to specific areas, the government said.

Similar measures could also apply to prisoners let out on licence, while drug testing would be expanded to include all those released, rather than just those with a history of substance misuse.

While judges are currently able to impose limited bans for specific crimes, such as football bans for crimes committed inside a stadium on match day, the new measures would allow for such bans to be handed down for any offence.

The justice secretary said: “When criminals break society’s rules, they must be punished.

“Those serving their sentences in the community must have their freedom restricted there too.

“These new punishments should remind all offenders that, under this government, crime does not pay.

“Rightly, the public expect the government to do everything in its power to keep Britain safe, and that’s what we’re doing.”

The proposals are part of the Labour government’s efforts to tackle overcrowding in prisons.

Back in June, it emerged that prisoners were to be transferred to lower security jails in an effort to ease overcrowding, as part of a new measure quietly unveiled by the government.

Sky News reported earlier this month how the prison system was close to collapse on a number of occasions between autumn 2023 and summer 2024, according to an independent review by former chief inspector of prisons, Dame Anne Owers.

The report said there was a systemic problem which has led to recurring prison capacity crises over the last 18 years.

UK

Police separate anti-immigration and anti-racism protesters across the country

Published

17 hours ago

August 23, 2025

admin

Police separate anti-immigration and anti-racism protesters across the country

Protesters have gathered across the country as groups demonstrated against asylum seeker housing and were met by anti-racism campaigners.

Demonstrations under the Abolish Asylum System slogan were held in England, Scotland and Wales, including in Bristol, Exeter, Tamworth, Cannock, Aberdeen, Mold, Perth, Nuneaton, Liverpool, Wakefield, Newcastle, Horley and Canary Wharf.

Counter-protests were also organised by campaign group Stand Up to Racism.

In Bristol, mounted police separated the two groups in the Castle Park, with officers scuffling with protesters.

Police kept around 200 anti-immigration protesters draped in English flags away from roughly 50 Stand Up to Racism protesters in Horley, Surrey.

One man, wearing a West Ham United football shirt, was held by police as he yelled: “You’re not welcome here, you’re not welcome here, you’re not welcome here” at anti-racism protesters.

Anti-immigration protesters also chanted: “Tommy, Tommy, Tommy, Tommy Robinson” in support of the far-right activist, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon.

The anti-racism protesters chanted “say it loud, say it clear, refugees are welcome here” and held signs calling for solidarity and to “stop deportations”.

The Stand Up to Racism protesters were shepherded into a smaller area as they continued to chant: “No hate, no fear, refugees are welcome here”, which was met with “No they’re f****** not” from the other side of the street.

In Perth, protesters gathered outside the Radisson Hotel.

The anti-migration protesters held up signs with slogans such as “Perth is full – empty the hotels” and “get them out”.

Stand Up to Racism Scotland said it had achieved “victory” in Perth, with more than 200 gathering to oppose the Abolish Asylum System demonstration.

In Liverpool, a dispersal order was issued to try and contain the protests.

Saturday’s events come amid continued tension around the use of the hotels for asylum seekers.

Regular protests had been held outside the Bell Hotel in Epping, Essex, which started after an asylum seeker housed there was charged with sexually assaulting a 14-year-old girl on 10 July.

Hadush Gerberslasie Kebatu, 38, was charged with trying to kiss a teenage girl and denies the allegations. He is due to stand trial later this month.

In the wake of those protests, Epping Forest District Council sought and won an interim High Court injunction to stop migrants from being accommodated there – a decision which the government is seeking permission to appeal.