The“Boys Who Hate Kemi Club” (and why they are wrong)

Robert Jenrick’s failure, despite all the efforts of his pals in the “Boys Who Hate Kemi Club”, has presented the opportunity for the Conservatives to talk about the economics of real life

The departure of Robert Jenrick from the Conservative Party to join Reform UK is perhaps less of a surprise than the earlier departures of Nadhim Zahawi and Jake Berry. The event has, however, re-opened the discussion, at least in the febrile world of Westminster media, about Kemi Badenoch as a leader. With all this accompanied by long discussions and thoughtful articles about how the centre-right is doomed because of ‘shifting plates’ or ‘new paradigms’ that result in the sort of politics we see in Europe with Le Pen’s National Rally in France, the Russophile AfD in Germany, the racist Vox in Spain and, of course, our own beloved Nigel Farage fan club, Reform.

There is a group of young, largely male, writers and pundits who I like to call the “Boys Who Hate Kemi Club” because they’ve spent the entirety of her leadership telling us how bad she is and that the Conservative Party is doomed under her leadership. The “Boys Who Hate Kemi” adopted a series of tropes about her leadership and character that the club members repeat to each other, gleefully sharing any new arrivals endorsing these tropes especially when they’ve a media profile. Some simply argue that Badenoch didn’t handle Jenrick’s sacking well, even hinting that she somehow manipulated the event by not giving Jenrick a big enough job. The public, 59% of whom think Kemi made the right decision, seem to differ. But there are a series of other tropes that matter if we are to understand why the “Boys Who Hate Kemi Club” exists:

1. Kemi was the safety first choice by the party. As Henry Hill at Conservative Home argues, Jenrick levelled some unspecified ‘challenges’ that have been unanswered and that… “by not offering any answers, Badenoch made herself the candidate of everyone who didn’t have any, but knew that they didn’t like Jenrick’s.”

2. Kemi is lazy, rude and self-centred. There have been comments, in respected journals like The Spectator as well as in the torrid world of ex-twitter, that Badenoch spends her time scrolling on her phone or, worse, playing Candy Crush. Comments about Kemi’s rudeness track back to the contest for party leader in 2024 so can probably be sourced to Jenrick’s team.

3. Kemi isn’t really British. The “Boys Who Hate Kemi Club” don’t overtly make this argument but it is a prominent trope in Reform and other right-wing forums. Vague references to her tardiness are accompanied by references to African or Nigerian culture and there’s a vibe to the club that they’d really prefer a nice, public school and Oxbridge educated white man, a sort of right wing version of Hugh Grant in ‘Love, Actually’. Or, obviously, Robert Jenrick

4. Kemi isn’t interested in policy. Hill refers to this as “...bromides about personal responsibility, lower taxes, and a smaller state…” and claims that the only substantial policy announcement - leaving the ECHR - was ‘Jenrick’s policy’.

5. Kemi didn’t campaign. The “Boys Who Hate Kemi Club” were excited by their man Jenrick’s effective media during the Summer and thought that this was the way forward. In William Atkinson’s world Jenrick was the only effective Tory, largely on the basis of one ‘cut-through’ video about fare-dodging plus Bobby J’s own claims.

Kemi Badenoch is a long way from a complete leader. Had I been a Party member back in 2024 I’d probably have voted for Robert Jenrick. But then I’d have voted for Liz Truss so what do I know! Despite this, I think it is a mad idea that you start campaigning on new policies pretty much day one after the Conservatives were dumped unceremoniously from government by an angry electorate. It’s true that, as Jenrick did, you can point to real issues with immigration, with petty crime and with litter in Birmingahm, but you need to step beyond simply saying ‘Britain is Broken’ by offering a coherent way to fix the fractures rather than, as Reform has done, simply riding the wave of anger about the country that evident from both right and left.

To win an election the Conservative Party needs to be credible and believable. It could choose to do what Jenrick wanted and play Nigel Farage’s game of simply relating people’s fears and concerns back to them. But Farage is a lot better than anyone else at this deceptive game so the Tories would simply be a pale echo of Reform. Instead the Conservatives need to, as it were, triangulate between the rage of many ordinary people, what’s possible in Britain’s fractured political world, and a programme for government that might stand a fighting chance of turning stuff round. For all their claims, Reform is a single issue, one man party. Attracting some beaten Tories inside Nigel’s tent may help get some policy heft but it also risks the public simply seeing Reform as the Tories rebadged (and worse filled with the very men who made the mess in the first place).

The positioning challenge for the Conservatives requires them to be in a different place in the public’s mind map. The space to fill isn’t the now crowded one of immigration but an economic one. At the moment the only Party making any analysis or argument around the cost of living is Zack Polanski’s Greens but he wants to blame inflation on the shop not the state. Ordinary voters may worry about immigration and issues of identity but they are much more affected by how much it costs to fill up the car, spiraling energy bills and the agony of a £150 weekly shopping bill that not so long ago was £95. Part of the reason for this cost of living crunch sits squarely with the current government, with excessive borrowing, taxes on jobs, and the continuing financial disaster that is net zero.

I don’t know whether Badenoch’s Conservative Party will manage this pivot since the media doesn’t want to talk about the cost of living, literal bread and butter issues, preferring to get over-excited about Donald Trump’s latest craziness, goings on in Israel or somebody weeping crocodile tears over the fate of refugees. Plus the far right. But, without Jenrick’s “Reform Light” approach there’s a chance that we get a Conservative platform not just talking about nation and tradition but about the third part of Disraeli’s mission - the betterment of people’s lives. And the starting point is to talk about people’s economic circumstances because, for all the talk of ‘identity’ politics dominating, it remains undoubtedly true that people bother most about their home, their family and how much they have in the bank at the end of the month. James Carville is still right that “it’s the economy, stupid”. And you can only get so far by blaming people’s economic circumstances on immigrants, billionaires or globalism. In the end people want their government to get to grips with inflation, unemployment and the conditions of ordinary people. This, not immigration, identity or culture will be the defining issue come the 2029 election.

Robert Jenrick’s failure, despite all the efforts of his pals in the “Boys Who Hate Kemi Club”, has presented the opportunity for the Conservatives to talk about the economics of real life, about why people can’t get work, about why the pub, corner shop and hairdresser have closed, about the reasons for rising food prices, and about the policies that can put these things right. Part of this is about controlling immigration. Another part is about getting public services so they are actually a service. But a whole load more is about getting business to thrive, making hiring easy and reducing the costs on businesses that are driving inflation.