Newsletter #70: Jenrick defects to Reform

PLUS: Nadim Zahawi, Laila Cunningham, and Malcolm Offord

Good morning,

Finally, a big week in British politics, or at least for Reform, which will be the focus of all three sections today. As a result, it’s a double-length newsletter this week: lucky you.

This newsletter’s agenda: Robert Jenrick defects to Reform (free); Was it a mistake to accept Nadim Zahawi? (paid); Reform appoints local leadership in Scotland and London (paid)

Robert Jenrick defects to Reform

This Thursday began with an event for which there is essentially no precedent in modern British political history: Kemi Badenoch woke up before midday. At around 11am, she sent a video to all Tory members via email and to the media, explaining that she had not only sacked Robert Jenrick from the shadow cabinet, but removed the whip and even suspended his party membership, having been presented with ‘irrefutable evidence’ that he was planning to defect to Reform ‘in the most damaging way possible’ to both the Conservative party in general and his shadow cabinet colleagues individually.

Despite initial rumours of the serendipitous discovery of a printed copy of Jenrick’s resignation speech being discovered by one of Kemi’s team on a CCHQ kitchen table, it quickly became clear that a junior member of Jenrick’s own team had leaked screenshots of the document to the party leader late Wednesday evening. The previous Thursday had seen a Shadow Cabinet away-day, at which Jenrick’s seeming lack of interest and engagement had been noted by Badenoch’s team as a potential sign of unrest. Badenoch then invited Jenrick to meet on Wednesday, before receiving the screenshots, where it is suspected she offered to promote him to Shadow Chancellor (poor Mel Stride) in exchange for his continued loyalty. Jenrick did not confirm this, but suggested that his conversations with Badenoch did not reassure him that fundamental change was possible under her leadership, regardless of his own position. Having decided to remove him by Thursday morning, Badenoch delegated the task of informing Jenrick to Chief Whip Rebecca Harris.

As the news of Jenrick’s firing broke, Farage was in the midst of a press conference announcing Malcolm Offord as Reform’s leader in Scotland (more on that later). Media questions at the briefing therefore bounced somewhat schizophrenically between local Scottish outlets asking questions about issues obscure to those south of the border and national press pushing Farage for comment on the bigger story. Farage confirmed that he had been in conversation with Jenrick, but that there had been no plans for an immediate defection, and said he would be calling Jenrick once they wrapped up their conference. Indeed, Reform had a second press conference scheduled for 4:30pm in London, which was billed as a pillory against delays to local elections.

A suspense-filled afternoon was finally broken just after 4pm, with the following ominous tweet:

Shortly after, Farage came onto stage at Reform’s Millbank HQ and announced that he had indeed been in discussions with Jenrick; that those discussions were now over, and that he was pleased to welcome his party’s newest MP. If there was suspicion that this had been planned for Thursday all along, it was eliminated by the two minutes that followed — which must have been the longest two minutes of Farage’s political career — as the day’s rushed choreography meant Jenrick failed to appear on cue.

That momentary embarrassment soon evaporated as Jenrick came on stage to deliver what was perhaps the most damaging speech to a party leader that has been given by a British politician since Geoffrey Howe resigned from the cabinet of Margaret Thatcher. Whilst not necessarily a gifted orator, Jenrick is certainly capable of delivering a message effectively, and so he did. He provided a comprehensive summary of Britain’s decline, before pointing the finger squarely at the Conservative party:

‘I will never forget attending a Cabinet meeting where a “plan” to stop the boats was signed off that everyone accepted – knew – wasn’t going to work. Some even joked about it. I resigned days later.’

…

‘At a recent shadow cabinet, a debate broke out. The question was put to the group: is Britain broken? I said it’s broken. Almost all said it’s not broken. And we were told that’s the party line. A few had a third view. It is broken, but we can’t say so because the Conservative Party broke it.

If they won’t admit publicly to you – the people – what they broke, how can you have any faith they will fix it? The Conservative Party in Westminster isn’t sorry. It doesn’t get it – and hasn’t really changed.’

…

‘Now, the people I’m about to mention are all decent people. But I need to explain myself.

Look at the top table – the shadow chancellor, Mel Stride, has rightly attacked Labour for hiking taxes to fund more scrounging. There’s just one problem. He was the Cabinet minister who oversaw the explosion of the welfare bill. And it was him that blocked the reforms needed.

Priti Patel, the shadow foreign secretary, created the migration system that enabled five million migrants to come here – the greatest failure of any British government in the post-war period. When asked about this last year, she defended her actions. She doesn’t believe she did anything wrong.’

…

‘Let me be clear. They doubled down. I can’t kid myself any more. The party hasn’t changed and it won’t. The bulk of the party don’t get it, don’t have the stomach for the radical change this country needs.’

What are we to make of the day’s events, and what will their impact be on the British right?

Firstly, did Jenrick jump or was he pushed by a Conservative leader keen to defenestrate her principal rival and shore up her position within her party? It is impossible to know whether his claims that he had made up his mind are true — he could hardly claim otherwise, and having been so thoroughly extirpated from the party he had spent decades building a career within he had little choice but to immediately defect to Reform, lest he be abandoned in the wilderness with only Rupert Lowe for company. Having written such a speech, it seems hard to argue that there was still a part of him considering remaining within the party. Our guess is that he had indeed decided to defect, but was holding out for commitment from Farage to appoint him as Reform’s Shadow Chancellor before confirming that decision. Whilst that appointment may still come, and may even be a positive development, it is undoubtedly better for Farage to retain flexibility having had Jenrick’s leverage removed for him by Badenoch.

Secondly, did Badenoch make the right call in getting ahead of Jenrick’s defection? Tory politicians and commentators have been out in force, praising Badenoch’s ‘strong action’ against him. The reality, though, is that the moment Jenrick stepped out on stage at Reform HQ, anything that had happened previously became irrelevant to anyone outside Westminster. What will be remembered by the public is not Badenoch’s pre-emptive action, but Jenrick’s unrelenting broadside against his former party. That said, there is nothing more that Badenoch could have done to limit the damage, and what her actions have certainly achieved is the confirmation of her own position, which may well have been threatened by a surprise defection. She played a disastrous hand as well as she could have done, but her prize is remaining captain of a ship which was already sinking and is now rapidly catching fire as well.

Indeed, the ludicrous suggestions that the departure of Jenrick leaves the Conservative party in a stronger position, freed of internal disagreements, show that many in the commentariat have still failed completely to understand the nature of the situation. The hypocrisy of Tory loyalists attacking a former colleague for their naked ambition aside, Conservatives will find it impossible to land attacks on the person that many within and outside the party considered one of their most valuable assets and who was consistently promoted throughout his time in government. If they truly believe him to be a wastrel, why did so many of them nominate him for the leadership? Why did Badenoch appoint him to her Shadow Cabinet?

Thursday’s speech is just the first in what will be a constant series of attacks levied by someone who was in the room at every turn as the Conservative Party betrayed its voters, destroyed the country, and laughed whilst doing so. Every time that Jenrick reveals a new story of Tory betrayal, Badenoch will be forced to defend the legacy that she has tried so hard to run away from, or to vindicate his judgement that Reform offers a better vehicle for change if she refuses to do so. As soon as Jenrick left the stage at Reform HQ, all the worst ghouls of the past fourteen years emerged from the woodwork, praising Badenoch’s leadership and encouraging her to return to ‘sensible, pragmatic conservatism’ now that the nefarious influence of the ‘far right’ had been vanquished. This path will almost certainly lead the party to new lows in the polls, and yet with a gaping hole to her right it will be difficult for Badenoch to resist the pull to the center.

Jenrick’s defection is, as such, a disaster for the Tories. But is it a good thing for Reform? It is certainly the case that the party is running the risk of tainting itself by association as it accepts more and more Tory defectors, but the extent to which this is the case is easily overstated. Nobody outside of Westminster has ever heard of something called ‘Jake Berry’, let alone can they identify such a creature as an agent of Boris Johnson. On current polling averages, 45% of the population intends to vote for Labour, the Lib Dems, or the Greens. On a purely mathematical basis, there aren’t a lot of committed socialists left over who might be lending their support to Farage.

Indeed, the often-touted Labour-Reform swing voter is not necessarily all it’s cracked up to be. Just as with Boris Johnson’s coalition in the ‘red wall’, most of the voters supporting Reform in historic Labour areas are not out-of-work coal miners pining for a return to post-war social democracy. They are far more likely to be in the trades or running small businesses. If they are employed, it is in what remains of the private sector. These are the people who support the two-child benefit cap and are incensed at their rising tax bills (if, that is, they haven’t found a way to operate on a cash basis). Those who receive their income from the state, whether as an employee or a benefits claimant, are still supporting Labour and always will.

Reform should therefore be less concerned about being viewed as a right wing party, but that is not to say they should be blasé about further association with the Conservatives. Where they do have a great deal of support, as Farage has had for the past two decades, is among the disaffected and non-voters. This constituency certainly do regard the Conservatives negatively, not because of their stated policies but as a party of the establishment which has consistently lied to the electorate. It therefore matters greatly which conservatives they allow into their ranks, and it remains to be seen whether Jenrick truly has credibility among this crowd.

Where Jenrick definitely brings value to Reform is credibility in government. This is an issue which is often underrated, because mid-term polling allows voters to ignore their concerns over the viability of a party as a governing force and register their dissatisfaction freely, but there is good reason for the near-universal trend of populist parties losing ground during the election itself. Given that ‘no harm’ is the best result that can be expected from Reform’s capture of local governments, it is crucial that their national team seem plausible by the time the general election comes into view.

Of course, some of this ground can be made up by bringing in talented figures from outside of politics, including business and academia (the addition of James Orr is positive for this reason). Ultimately, though, Reform will need individuals who understand how government works currently if they are to be successful in changing it. Despite bringing in some crusty grandees from the Blair years, Labour have had a great deal of difficulty grasping the machinery of state as ministers who entered parliament during opposition attempt to manage civil servants with decades of experience frustrating the will of politicians. This dynamic must be navigated; legislation must be passed — Jenrick brings experience that will help with both.

Jenrick also brings some clarity of vision to a party which has, as yet, a rather impressionistic programme for government. His assessment of Britain’s problems is almost identical to Farage’s, but, unlike any of Reform’s existing team, he is someone willing to work through the weeds of policy to find solutions. He is therefore an excellent complement to that team. Farage and Yusuf can point effectively to the ills of broken Britain, Kruger and Orr can provide deeper analysis of their causes — Jenrick is the person best placed to stand between the two, and construct an agenda for national renewal.

And what of Jenrick himself? We are, after all, placing a great deal of responsibility on the shoulders of a politician who was initially elected as a Cameroon and who remained relatively in the center of the Tory party until only a few years ago — as undoubtedly will Farage, with a front bench appointment now inevitable. Can we trust such a person?

Let’s deal with the obvious first. Jenrick was not just a member of the Conservative government, but served as immigration minister under Rishi Sunak at the tail end of the Boriswave. It’s important to recognize that this, on its own, does not tell us much about Jenrick’s true beliefs. Britain has long since ceased to practice meaningful cabinet government, and it is absurd to suggest that a member of Cabinet, let alone a minister within a department, has the autonomy to push a policy that contradicts the desires of the Prime Minister except in the most exceptional cases. There are questions over the precise machinations that led up to the event, but the fact remains that Jenrick resigned from this position and made explicit at the time that his decision was the result of a refusal to carry out a policy that both he, the Home Secretary (Suella Braverman), and the Prime Minister knew could not succeed in bringing down legal and illegal migration.

It is never possible to know the truth of a person’s motivations, but Jenrick’s account of his political transformation is entirely reasonable, and indeed predictable. In fact, the vast majority of people who now consider themselves to be some form of right-wing followed exactly the same trajectory over exactly the same period, beginning with COVID and the George Floyd riots and continuing as the Boriswave wrought untold transformation upon the country. It is particularly entertaining to see members of that group among Jenrick’s harshest critics, conveniently forgetting their own ideological failings from earlier times. How is it that Carl Benjamin, the Sage of Swindon, who in 2020 founded ‘the liberalists’ as the last bastion of race-blind libertarianism, feels able to critique others for being perhaps a eighteen months later to the party?

We are not in touch with Jenrick directly, and so cannot offer our own account of his inner truth, but friends of Pimlico Journal who are have no doubt that his views are as he represents them, and that is good enough for us. We would also remind readers that Jenrick spent most of last year positioned well to the right of Reform, not just on immigration but on economics and civil service reform as well, as Farage himself noted just over a year ago. For all these reasons, and for the simple fact that consolidation of the radical right within Reform clarifies the political road ahead and improves the chance of a functional majority in 2029, we think Jenrick’s defection is very good news indeed.

A few other threads to tie up on this topic before we move on. It’s always slightly unfair when one politician in particular gets labelled ‘ambitious’, as if every MP in the house and every staffer serving them doesn’t get just that little bit stiffer imagining themselves entering No. 10, but it is certainly not wrong to point out that Jenrick is a man who wants to be Prime Minister. That said, any talk of Jenrick challenging Farage or in any way showing disloyalty is completely indulgent on the part of the chattering class. One does not join ‘a protest party led by the Messiah’ to challenge Christ for the crown. One look at the two sat together at Thursday’s press conference tells you everything you need to know about the power dynamic between Jenrick and Farage. He will make no trouble, and indeed has no incentive to — he is a young man, who will almost certainly hold a great office of state in the next government, serving a leader who will be a not-too-spritely 65 upon entering office and who has already tried to retire twice. He is smart enough to know that his best bet is to make Reform a success, and to fight it out with Zia Yusuf and others to succeed Farage when he retires.

Finally, will there be others following Jenrick over the line? Many of his supporters were stalwarts of the Tory right who have been in Parliament since the Thatcher years — it is hard to see them defecting now. Neil O’Brien, perhaps the party’s best policy mind, would be a coup for Reform, but is currently serving in a bespoke Shadow Cabinet role constructing the party’s new platform and has shared criticisms of Jenrick following his defection. It’s unlikely, then, that he will be following in his footsteps.

Jack Rankin and Katie Lam, two of the 2024 intakes most prominent right-wingers, have also been mooted as potential defectors, but in our view neither are likely to make the jump. Rankin’s seat in Windsor is one of the few likely to survive 2029 with a Tory majority, and Reform support there is very limited. He has reiterated his support for the party, which seems genuine (if misguided). Lam, who shares an office with Rankin, is politically aligned with Jenrick — but the two are not personally close, as rivals for chief tribune of the Tory right. With Jenrick’s departure, Lam’s influence will grow — but how much damage can the party sustain before that becomes a hollow prize? The third 2024 alum who has historically been considered a Jenrick ally, Nick Timothy, was appointed Jenrick’s replacement before his defection was even official.

There is one MP who could follow Jenrick’s lead: Suella Braverman. She has had a number of conversations with Reform over the past year, and we understand that her reluctance to jump was in part due to hopes of a return to the front benches under a future Jenrick leadership. Braverman has been quiet since the election, only making a public splash during debates over the basis of English identity when she declared that she was not, and never could be, English on account of her ethnic background. She has, however, done some good work on legal reform, including producing a paper on leaving the ECHR alongside Richard Tice and the Prosperity Institute. She would therefore have some merit as a defector.

The main downside of Braverman from our perspective is her foreign policy views: she is an unreformed Atlanticist and a particularly fervent supporter of Israel — neither necessarily disqualifying, but we would prefer a Reform government recognize all foreign states as precisely that and advance British interests as a priority. Her pivot to foreign policy indicates it is here that she would seek a role. That said, with the exception of Zia Yusuf, Reform is remarkably united on these issues, with Farage being one of the few remaining major party leaders in Europe willing to express continued commitment to the US relationship without any caveat. On that basis, perhaps her advantages in other places outweigh the risk.