Get all your news in one place.
100’s of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - UK
The Guardian - UK
Politics
Andrew Sparrow

Tories shocked at Cleverly exit while Labour MP says Badenoch-Jenrick contest is a ‘gift’ – as it happened

Robert Jenrick Kemi Badenoch James Cleverly Tom Tugendhat Iain Duncan Smith Kay Burley Party Bob Blackman Caroline Dinenage Sir Keir Starmer
Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick
Tory party members will now vote on Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick Photograph: Christopher Thomond/The Guardian

Early evening summary

Updated

Robert Jenrick and Kemi Badenoch have both posted tributes on social media to James Cleverly.

Jenrick says:

What a campaign @JamesCleverly. You fought brilliantly and had a great conference. The Conservative Party needs you in its top team in the years ahead.

And Badenoch says:

Commiserations to my friend, @JamesCleverly. He ran a campaign full of energy, ideas and optimism. James has shown great leadership at many levels including holding two of the great offices of state. He has dedicated himself to the Conservative party and I look forward to continuing to work with him.

Kemi Badenoch and Robert Jenrick will debate each other on Thursday next week at 7pm on GB News (of course), Christopher Hope from the station reports.

The only agreed TV leadership event between Robert Jenrick and Kemi Badenoch is 7pm on Thursday next week exclusively on @GBNEWS.

Here is video of the moment the result was announced.

Jackie Doyle-Price, a former Tory MP, has said the party should change the way it elects its leaders.

Conservative MPs should vote for who they want to be leader. Then they might just get the leader they want. It is time to change the rules to get rid of elimination ballots as they are simply driving perverse behaviour

Paul Goodman, a former Tory MP and former editor of the ConservativeHome website who is now a Conservative peer, told Radio 4’s PM programme this evening that the ballot result this afternoon was a “very difficult” one for the party because MPs have failed to give members a clear steer as to who they want as leader.

He said the result was broadly similar to the final ballot result in 2001, when three candidates (Ken Clarke, Iain Duncan Smith and Michael Portillo) roughly got a third of the votes each. He went on:

I’m afraid that did not do the Conservative party, or Iain in the long run, any good.

You need to be able to send a strong signal to the members, who have the final vote, that the parliamentary party is lined up behind one person. And that has not happened.

Conservative members will feel “disenfranchised” by this result, the Tory MP Roger Gale has said.

I fear that many loyal members of the Conservative Party will feel disenfranchised by this result: I have to date not declared my endorsement and I do not propose to do so now. 1/2

But the figures are not decisive and although one candidate- James Cleverly - has been eliminated the Parliamentary Party has sent a very confused message to those who will now have to lead not only the Party but the Official Opposition in the House of Commons. 2/2

One Tory MP said they were now getting messages from local members saying “what the hell are you doing?” after two candidates from the right got onto the final ballot, PA Media reports. PA says:

The MP said: “One of two things has happened. Either a number of people lent James Cleverly their votes yesterday and rolled them back. Or James Cleverly’s lent votes to Robert Jenrick and over-egged it.”

But there was also the possibility of individuals backing their second favourite candidate, assuming their preferred choice was already safe.

The MP said supporters of both Robert Jenrick and Kemi Badenoch had been asking MPs suspected of backing James Cleverly to lend support to one of them to get them on the ballot.

The Tory source said they did not “fall for that” but “it’s possible some people may have been dumb enough”.

Tim Farron, the former Lib Dem leader, says he thinks the election result provides a huge opportunity for his party.

Well…blimey! I think this could actually be the point when the Tory party ceases to be a movement contending for government. Lib Dems now have a very serious responsibility and opportunity to fill the gap. This is our moment.

One Nation Tories warn Badenoch/Jenrick shortlist could damage party's chances of electoral recovery

Gavin Barwell, who was Theresa May’s chief of staff when she was PM, thinks the ballot result is bad news for his party.

The Conservative Party following in the fine tradition of parties who have lost elections choosing to go further away from the electorate (see 1979, 1997 and 2010). Keir Starmer continues to be a very lucky general (Johnson, Truss, Sturgeon, now this)

David Gauke, the former justice secretary, is equally alarmed. He left the party over Brexit, but in July he posted on X a link to an article he had written about why he had rejoined the Tories.

This afternoon he reposted the tweet with this comment.

Well that was £39 that could’ve been better spent

James Heappey, the former defence minister and another former Tory MP from the One Nation tradition, has expressed alarm about the vote.

Gutted for @JamesCleverly. I honestly thought he was one to detoxify party & bridge gap between voters lost to both Reform & Lib Dems. Feels awfully like a few people have tried to be a bit too clever with votes this afternoon. Important this doesn’t now become race to the right.

Tim Shipman from the Sunday Times thinks it could work out well for James Cleverly after all.

Cleverly says being knocked out of Tory leadership contest 'massively disappointing'

James Cleverly has released a video on social media saying the result of the ballot is “massively disappointing”.

He has urged the party to unite.

I’m grateful for the support I’ve received on this campaign from colleagues, party members and the public.

Sadly it wasn’t to be. We are all Conservatives, and it’s important the Conservative Party unites to take on this catastrophic Labour government.

Here is more reaction from commentators to what just happened in the Tory leadership ballot.

From Christopher Hope at GB News

Westminster is in shock at the exit of James Cleverly. A proper political jaw dropper, the biggest in Tory politics since Boris Johnson dropped out of the Tory leadership contest in 2016. One Conservative strategist told me: “There is no amount of campaigning, messaging and briefing that can account for the sheer duplicity of Tory MPs.

From Katy Balls from the Spectator

🚨What just happened?!

As one Tory strategist puts it:

‘No amount of briefing, strategy or campaigning can account for the sheer duplicity and scheming of Conservative MPs.’

And here is an article from her Spectator article on the vote.

For what it’s worth, there are currently two theories doing the rounds among MPs. The first is that Team Cleverly attempted vote lending to have a preferred opponent in the final two and it spectacularly backfired. The other theory is that the vote lending took place on Tuesday – with some Jenrick supporters trying to boost Cleverly to hurt Badenoch – only it went wrong, when Jenrick actually went back two. Therefore they had to consolidate today. In truth, no-one will really ever know what happened in the secret ballot – but the numbers suggest either game-playing or a new level of indecisiveness among Tory MPs.

From Sam Coates from Sky News

I’m being told that while Teams Badenoch and Jenrick were hitting the phones James Cleverly was prominent first on the Commons terrace and then at Boris Johnson’s book launch for a long stint.

Perhaps some over confidence?

From Kate McCann from Times Radio

From ITV’s Robert Peston

I did not see that coming. Cleverly out. Badenoch vs Jenrick. Yesterday I was told Jenrick lent votes to Cleverly to oust Tugendhat. I didn’t believe it. Now that gossip feels credible

From the FT’s Robert Shrimsley

Golly. Does this mean Jenrick was vote lending yesterday to try to block Kemi? On one hand it seems too tight to take risks, on other why would Cleverly fall back?

Other option is that Cleverly backers thought it was safe to try to ensure he faced a weaker candidate - although given he hadn’t yet reached the threshold that would surely be too stupid for the “most sophisticated electorate in the world”

From Lewis Goodall from the News Agents podcast

The end of instability in British politics was greatly exaggerated.

Audible gasps from Tory MPs at Cleverly's exit

My colleague Pippa Crerar says she has spoken to Tory MPs who were voting for their second preference candidate today because they assumed James Cleverly was certain of making the final two.

Audible gasps in room at result - James Cleverly was 18 points ahead y’day.

I’ve spoken to Tory MPs today who were voting for their preferred *second* candidate in final two - all were working on basis Cleverly was safe.

“The most sophisticated electorate in the world”

Updated

Like Labour (see 3.49pm), the Liberal Democrats are also in triumphalist mood over the result of the Tory ballot.

Key event

There were 20 Tory MPs who voted for Tom Tugendhat yesterday who could not vote for him today because he was eliminated.

Based on their politics, and the pitches they were making in the contest (leadership and authority, more than policy) people assumed that many or most of the Tugendhat votes would go to James Cleverly.

Yet all those votes seem to have gone to Kemi Badenoch (who is up 12) or Robert Jenrick (who is up 10). Cleverly actually lost 2 votes, which explains why the gains add up to 22, not 20.

It does not seem likely that not one of those 20 Tugendhat MPs favours Cleverly as leader, and so – as Alex Wickham says (see 3.52pm) – this looks like freelance vote lending has messed up. Some MPs may have backed Badenoch to keep Jenrick out (he has the most extreme position on the the ECHR) and some may have backed Jenrick to keep Badenoch out (she is seen as divisive, and may have had a better chance of beating Cleverly).

In the third round ballot the two “left” candidates (Cleverly, 39, and Tugendhat, 20) had 59 votes between them – almost as many as the two “right” candidates, 61 (Jenrick, 31, and Badenoch, 30).

With Tugendhat out, the “left” should easily have had enough votes to get a “left” candidate on the ballot paper. If this is a reasonable way of describing the contest (and it is how many Tories think – even though left/right in Tory terms does not mean the same as left/right in normal terms), then the left has messed up spectacularly.

Alex Wickham from Bloomberg has posted this explanation for what happened.

Tories saying they think the Cleverly camp lent Jenrick votes to try to keep Badenoch off the ballot but lent too many. Or Cleverly supporters did it off their own backs thinking he was nailed on for the final

Labour are happy. This is from my colleague Pippa Crerar.

One Labour MP texts to ask if the Tory leadership result needs to be declared as a gift...

And this is from Aubrey Allegretti from the Times.

A Labour MP texts: “I see the Prime Minister has just found the magic lamp from the bottom of the moving boxes.”

What poll/survey evidence suggests will happen when Tory members have to choose between Badenoch and Jenrick

Kemi Badenoch is now the favourite. This is what the ConservativeHome survey of Tory members on Sunday suggested would happen if she went head to head with Robert Jenrick in the final ballot – Badenoch winning with a 20-point lead.

ConHome surveys of Tory members have a good record of predicing the winner, although in the last two contests they overstated the extent to which Boris Johnson and Liz Truss (both the rightwing candidate in the final two) were ahead.

YouGov did a proper poll of Tory members just before the conference. It also suggested Badenoch would beat Jenrick but by a much smaller margin – by 52% to 48%.

Updated

All the commentators (including me) have been confounded. James Cleverly seemed a dead cert to get through, but he is out.

The immediate assumption is that MPs who wanted Cleverly have been too clever by half, switching votes thinking he was safe.

Here are the figures again, with the changes from yesterday.

Kemi Badenoch: 42 (up 12 from yesterday, when she was up 2 from the previous round)

Robert Jenrick: 41 (up 10 from yesterday, when he was down 2 from the previous round)

James Cleverly: 37 (down 2 from yesterday, when he was up 18 from the previous round)

Cleverly eliminated in shock result, and Badenoch and Jenrick are in the final ballot for Tory leader

Here are the results.

Kemi Badenoch: 42

Robert Jenrick: 41

James Cleverly: 37

That is a massive surprise.

Bob Blackman, chair of the Conservative 1922 Committee, is due to announce the results of the leadership ballot in about five minutes.

What happens if there's a draw in Tory leadership ballot?

A reader asks:

@Andrew - what happens if two of the leadership contenders get the same number of votes - coin toss, paper/scissors/stones or pistols at dawn?

Probably what happened last time. This happened in 2001, when the late Michael Ancram and David Davis were tied in last place. There was no provision in the rules for what should happen, and so Michael Spicer, the 1922 Committee chair, ordered a rerun the following day, with the proviso that both candidates would drop out if they were tied again. But on the second vote Ancram was eliminated.

The Times today is reporting that ministers are considering what it describes as an “HS2 light” rail line between Birmingham and Manchester, replacing the original HS2 planned for that stretch but cancelled by Rishi Sunak.

In their report, Oliver Wright, Ben Clatworthy and Steven Swinford say this would involve a new stretch of track runnng between Birmingham and Crewe, where trains would run faster than the current West Coast mainline, but slower than HS2. They report:

Supporters of the plan for a new line beyond Birmingham believe it would be up to 40 per cent cheaper to build than the previous HS2 link between the city and Manchester.

Senior government figures said that a final decision would have to wait for the government’s three-year spending review due in the spring.

But they said there was “little option” but to push ahead with a version of the scheme because of a “capacity crunch” on the main West Coast mainline when HS2 starts running in the early 2030s.

This is because under current plans HS2 trains will move on existing tracks after Birmingham but will have a smaller passenger numbers than the Pendolino trains that operate on the service.

Asked about the report at the post-PMQs lobby briefing, a No 10 spokesperson said: “We are reviewing the position we have inherited on HS2, and we will set out further decisions and plans on that in due course.”

Jeremy Hunt, the shadow chancellor, has urged the government to “be honest” about its budget plans. Speaking about Keir Starmer’s comments at PMQs (see 2.13pm), he said:

The prime minister has today left the door open to the Labour Party breaking their promises to the British people by raising taxes and increasing borrowing, leaving future generations to pick up the bill and risking higher interest rates.

Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves should have had the courage and conviction to be honest about the tax and borrowing plans they always planned.

Gus O’Donnell, a former cabinet secretary, has said he thinks there are not enough “policy heavyweights” working in No 10. Speaking on the World at One, where he was asked about the departure of Sue Gray as Keir Starmer’s chief of staff, O’Donnell said:

This is I think a loss all round. It’s a loss for Sue Gray, of her job, and it’s a loss for the government in her abilities.”

I do think there is a need for Number 10 to have a lot more heavyweights in there - policy heavyweights. I remember during Gordon Brown’s era there being very senior members of the policy unit - people like David Miliband, Geoff Mulgan, Andrew Adonis. They’re not there at the minute, and I think that is a shortfall.

SNP claims Council of Nations and Regions will be 'insult' to Scotland because Scottish mayors excluded

On Friday Keir Starmer is due to host the first meeting of his Council of Nations and Regions in Scotland. But the SNP are claiming it will be an “insult” to Scotland because English mayors have been invited, but not Scottish ones. In a statement issued by the SNP, the MSP Bob Doris says:

There is no excuse for Keir Starmer excluding the leaders of Scotland’s cities from a forum which is designed to boost intergovernmental cooperation which their counterparts in England will attend …

Hosting this meeting on a day trip to Scotland but choosing to snub our local leaders while inviting leaders in England is not just an insult – it is yet another gaffe from a prime minister who is stumbling from mistake to mistake and increasingly looks like he doesn’t know what he is doing.

Starmer refuses to rule out raising employers' national insurance and changing borrowing rules in budget

Here is the PA Media story from PMQs.

Keir Starmer has been accused of considering raising employer national insurance contributions and changing borrowing rules after he failed to rule out either proposal.

The prime minister was repeatedly urged by Conservative party leader Rishi Sunak to clarify his position amid reports that chancellor Rachel Reeves is eyeing up ways to unlock billions of pounds for additional spending.

After Starmer said he would not be drawn on such matters ahead of the budget on October 30, Sunak claimed his successor in Downing Street had “opened the door” to raising employer national insurance including on pensions and “fiddling the figures” to ensure more can be borrowed.

At the general election, Labour said it would not increase taxes on working people and included a commitment not to increase national insurance, income tax or VAT.

The party also outlined its fiscal rules to ensure it balanced day-to-day costs with revenues and getting debt falling as a share of the economy by the fifth year of forecasts.

Reports have suggested Reeves has been considering whether to use a different debt measure to the one she inherited from the previous Tory government.

Speaking at PMQs Sunak mocked Starmer over the ousting of Sue Gray as his chief of staff before switching attention to the economy.

The former prime minister said: “I know that not everything or everyone has survived his first 100 days in government, so can he confirm that when he promised not to raise income tax, national insurance or VAT, that commitment applies to both employer and employee national insurance contributions?”

Starmer replied: “We made an absolute commitment in relation to not raising tax on working people. He, of course, was the expert’s expert on raising taxes. What did we get in return for it? We got a broken economy, broken public services, and a £22bn black hole in the economy. We’re here to stabilise the economy, and we will do so.”

Sunak said he did not think Labour donor Lord Waheed Alli was “buying any of that nonsense”, adding: “I’m not asking about the budget, I’m asking specifically about the promise he made to the British people.

“So let me ask him again, just to clarify his own promise. Does his commitment not to raise national insurance apply to both employee and employer national insurance contributions?”

Starmer replied: “We set out our promises in our manifesto. We were returned with a huge majority to change the country for the better, and I stick to my promises in the manifesto.”

Turning attention to fiscal rules, Sunak said: “Before the election his chancellor said changing the debt target in the fiscal rules would be tantamount to fiddling the figures. Does he still agree with the chancellor?”

Starmer said: “This is literally the man who was in charge of the economy, 14 years they’ve crashed the economy. What did they leave? A £22bn black hole in the economy. Unlike them we won’t walk past it. We will fix it. And it’s only because we are stabilising the economy that we are getting the investment into this country.”

John Woodcock still in place as independent adviser on political violence, No 10 says, after reports said he was out

Yesterday Byline Times reported, on the basis of a briefing from the Home Office, that John Woodcock (Lord Walney) was no longer in post as the government’s independent adviser on political violence and disruption. But Woodcock, a former Labour MP who published a report recommending sweeping, and even draconian restrictions on protests, seems to have had a reprieve. At the post-PMQs lobby briefing a No 10 spokesperson said he remains in place for now. The spokesperson went on:

The home secretary is reviewing the landscape in relation to our approach to counter extremism, and that work will consider the role in the round as part of part of the government’s approach to counter extremism.

PMQs - snap verdict

In his final months as prime minister, PMQs was a terrible ordeal for Rishi Sunak, and there were not many occasions where he made the weather. But today, unburdened by the need to defend the record of the Conservative party in government, and able to deploy the standard PMQs technique of answering a question to which the PM either can’t or won’t reply, he had a successful outing. He mostly challenged Keir Starmer on two issues – employers’ national insurance contributions, and fiscal rules – and came away with evasive non-answers that were strong enough to make news.

Of the two topics, national insurance is probably more significant. There has already been ample talk of the government using the budget to change the definition of debt it uses for its debt target – as Kiran Stacey reports, Rachel Reeves raised this at cabinet this week – and Starmer’s wriggling on this issue was more a confirmation of what we expect than anything very surprising. But his national insurance answer will attract a lot more attention, particularly from the Tory papers. As Sunak pointed out, Labour never quite clarified during the election campaign what not raising taxes for “working people” meant, and if Reeves needs to raise significant money in the budget, employers’ NICs must be a potential target.

That said, the exchanges were all relatively low-energy, and neither Sunak nor Starmer seemed very interested in treating PMQs as a gladiatorial contest. Sunak, of course, is on his way out, and he seemed preoccupied with proving that he was right all along during the election campaign when he warned about Labour raising taxes – ie in winning an argument about the past, not the future.

And Starmer seems to have almost zero interest in the yah-boo, performative side of PMQs. He was not very compelling in the chamber today, but his authority remained intact and his MPs did not seem to mind. Against another opposition leader, his lack of interest in jokes and clever put-downs might be a problem for him. But it wasn’t today.

And I have beefed up the post at 12.10pm with the Sunak/Starmer exchanges about the fiscal rules. Again, you may have to refresh the page for the update to appear.

I have beefed up the post at 12.08pm with the full quotes from the exchange about national insurance. You may need to refresh the page to get the update to appear.

And this is from my colleague Kiran Stacey on the topic.

Updated

Dawn Butler (Lab) asks about Black History Month. She says she is going to a Temptations event organised by the Speaker to mark this. Will the Commons hold a debate on this?

Starmer says he probably should not be going to an event called Temptations at the moment. But he says he is glad Butler is coming to the Black History Month reception at No 10 tonight he is hosting.

And that was the last question.

Caroline Dinenage (Con) asks about flood prevention in her Gosport constituency.

Starmer says the Tories failed to invest enough in this. The government is setting up a flood resistant taskforce, he says.

Starmer says it is important for MPs to debate assisted dying bill - but fails to commit to giving it all time needed to pass

David Davis (Con) asks about the assisted dying bill. The time constraints will make it hard for MPs to get the bill right. If MPs fail to do this, the consequences will be terrible. Will the government commit to giving the Commons time to debate it properly, as happened with the David Steel abortion bill.

Starmer says it is important to get the bill right. There is a need for a discussion on this important issue, he says.

He says, if the bill gets a second reading, it will go to committee.

But he fails to commit to ensuring that the bill is guaranteed all the time it needs to pass.

UPDATE: Davis said:

On the assisted dying private members’ bill, the government is quite rightly staying neutral. But the real issue with that bill is the time constraints of private legislation make it very difficult to get it right first time.

If we get this wrong first time the consequences are too terrible to contemplate.

In 1967 the government of the day gave government time to allow David Steel’s abortion bill to go through.

Would the prime minister commit to giving extra time out of government time to this bill to ensure that we get this right first time?

And Starmer replied:

I thank him for raising this question on a really important issue, and I do understand there are strongly held views across the House and on both sides and within both sides, if I can put it in that way.

I do agree with him that it is important that we ensure that any change to the law, if there is to be one, is effective.

Now, if this house gives the bill a second reading, it will, of course, then go to the committee as usual, which will allow that more detailed scrutiny.

But we do need a discussion more broadly on this important issue.

Updated

Robin Swann (UUP), a former health minister in Northern Ireland, says more people have lost their lives to suicide in Northern Ireland since the 1998 Good Friday agreement than lost their lives to the Troubles.

Starmer says he knows this is problem. The government is addressing this, he says.

Phil Brickell (Lab) asks what the government is doing to help hospices.

Starmer says the government wants everyone to have access to good end-of-life care. The government has told the NHS to commission services from hospices, he says.

Helen Morgan (Lib Dem) asks about road safety, and the rules used to decide when road improvement schemes should go ahead.

Starmer says a new road investment strategy is being planned. He offers Morgan a meeting with a minister.

Starmer accepts children with special educational needs 'are being failed', and says this must change

Julian Smith (Con) asks about special educational needs budgets in Yorkshire.

Starmer says this is an issue of real concern. Children with SEND “are being failed”, he says. The government has to change that, he says. He says he wants to raise standards.

Shivani Raja (Con) asks if the govenrment will do an impact assessment of the decision to put VAT on private school fees.

Starmer says he understands the aspiration of parents sending their children to private schools. But he also understands the aspiration of parents using state schools. The policy is designed to ensure state schools are properly funded, he says.

Starmer says report from government's child poverty taskforce will be published in spring next year

Meg Hillier (Lab) asks when the child poverty taskforce will report.

Starmer says it is appalling that child poverty went up by 700,000 after 2010. The taskforce report will be published in spring next year, he says.

Jim Allister (TUV) says there are more than 300 areas of law in Northern Ireland where law is set by the EU. He claims his constituents are disenfranchised as a result.

Starmer says that is an important issue. The government supports the Windsor framework, he says.

Sam Coates from Sky News has the Rachel Reeves quote that Sunak used at PMQs,

Starmer says Falklands Islands 'personal to me', because uncle fought in war, and 'they will remain British'

Ed Davey, the Lib Dem leader, asks why Starmer has ruled out a youth mobility scheme with the EU.

Starmer says the UK needs a better deal with the EU. He says he met Ursula von der Leyen to discuss improving it. But the government will stick to the red lines it set out at the election.

Davey says fishermen in the Falkland Islands either have to pay huge amounts in tariffs to sell fish to the EU, or sail under a Spanish flag. Will the government address this?

Starmer says his uncle almost lost his life when the ship he was on was torpedoed during the Falklands war. He says the Falklands are British and will stay British. That is personal to him, he says.

(He does not address the point about fish.)

UPDATE: Starmer said:

My uncle nearly lost his life when his ship was torpedoed defending the Falklands, they are British, and they will remain British. And sovereignty in Gibraltar is equally not to be negotiated.

Of course we will do everything we can to make it easier for all businesses to trade more freely so that we can grow our economy. I’ve been very clear about the Falklands, it’s personal to me.

Updated

Sunak ends by asking about national security, and the speech from the head of MI5 yesterday about the threats facing the UK.

Starmer says the government will of course toughen the law if it has to.

Starmer refuses to rule out government changing definition of debt used in its fiscal rules

Sunak asks about reports that the government will change the definition of debt. He says Rachel Reeves used to describe this as fiddling the figures.

Starmer refuses to be drawn on that, and criticises the Tories’ handling of the economy.

Sunak asks the question again. Does Starmer agree with what Reeves said about changing the fiscal rules.

Starmer claims Sunak is back to his old script, claiming the economy is doing well.

UPDATE: Sunak said:

Before the election his chancellor said changing the debt target in the fiscal rules would be tantamount to fiddling the figures.

Does he still agree with the chancellor?

And Starmer replied:

This is literally the man who was in charge of the economy, 14 years they’ve crashed the economy. What did they leave? A £22bn black hole in the economy.

Unlike them we won’t walk past it. We will fix it. And it’s only because we are stabilising the economy that we are getting the investment into this country. But I still notice he has hasn’t talked about that investment.

We are powering ahead with clean British energy, we are changing the rules to build 1.5 million homes and returning railways to public ownership, and they’ve got nothing to say about any of this.

Updated

Starmer refuses to say if manifesto pledge not to raise national insurance covers employers' NI as well as employees'

Sunak asks if the commitment not to raise tax for working people applies to employers’ national insurance as well as employees’ national insurance.

Starmer says he will not comment on the budget, but says the government will stabilise the economy.

Sunak says he was not asking about the budget. He asks the question again.

Starmer says he stands by his promises in the manifesto.

And he criticises Sunak for not mentioning the recent investment announcements. He lists a few of them, and says the Tories are just arguing about scrapping maternity pay.

UPDATE: Sunak said:

When [Starmer] talks about security at work, once again, it’s one rule for him and another rule for everyone else.

But I know that not everything or everyone has survived his first 100 days in government, so can he confirm that when he promised not to raise income tax, national insurance or VAT, that commitment applies to both employer and employee National Insurance contributions?

And Starmer replied:

We made an absolute commitment in relation to not raising tax on working people.

He, of course, was the expert’s expert on raising taxes. What did we get in return for it? We got a broken economy, broken public services, and a £22bn black hole in the economy. We’re here to stabilise the economy, and we will do so.

Then Sunak said:

I don’t think even Lord Alli is buying any of that nonsense. I’m not asking about the budget, I’m asking specifically about the promise he made the British people. So let me ask him again, just to clarify his own promise. Does his commitment not to raise national insurance apply to both employee and employer national insurance contributions?

Starmer replied:

We set out our promises in the manifesto. We were returned with a huge majority to change the country for the better, and I stick to my promises in the manifesto.

I notice it’s question three and he hasn’t yet welcomed the investment into this country. We’ve had in recent months, £8bn from Amazon for jobs across the country, £10n from Blackstone for jobs across the north east, £22bn on carbon capture jobs in the north-east and north-west, £500m for UK buses in in Northern Ireland. While we are investing in our economy, what are they doing? They’re arguing about whether to scrap maternity pay.

And Sunak said:

I’m very happy to welcome investments that this government negotiated.

When it comes to his answer on tax, businesses across the country will have found his answer just as reassuring as Sue Gray did when he promised to protect her job.

Updated

Rishi Sunak starts by saying the employment rights bill is out tomorrow. Given the weekend’s events, when did the PM first become a convert to fire and rehire.

That is a reference to Sue Gray being replaced.

Starmer says the bill will give workers more rights, and help grow the economy.

He ignores the point about Gray.

Gagan Mohindra (Con) asks about the cancellation of a new hospital in his constitiuency.

Starmer says the last government promised 40 new hospitals, but they weren’t new, they weren’t hospitals, and they weren’t funded.

Keir Starmer starts by saying the Commons marked the anniversary of 7 October this week. He restates his call for the hostages to be released, and for an immediate ceasefire.

He says the employment rights bill out tomorrow will deliver on his promise to deliver the biggest upgrade in workers’ rights for a generation.

And next week an investment summit will unlock billions of pounds of investment.

UPDATE: Starmer said:

This week the Government will deliver on our promise to the British people of the biggest upgrade to workers’ rights in a generation.

The employment rights bill will ensure work pays, it’ll forge a new partnership with business, and reset the dreadful industrial relations that have cost our economy and our NHS so much in recent years.

Updated

James Cleverly, the Tory leadership candidate, has released a letter to Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, criticising her over a report in the Sun saying she authorised police protection and a motorised escort for Taylor Swift when she was performing in London.

Starmer faces Sunak at PMQs

Keir Starmer is taking PMQs shortly. Here is the list of MPs down to ask a question.

Tories to vote against renters' rights bill, with Badenoch claiming it will bring in 'rent control through back door'

MPs will vote on the renters’ rights bill this afternoon. The main purpose of the bill is to end no-fault evictions, which was something that the last government promised to do and which would have happened with its renters’ reform bill, until it was watered down and dropped.

But today the Conservatives will vote against. Kemi Badenoch, the shadow housing secretary and leadership candidate, has tabled this reasoned amendment on behalf of the opposition.

That this house, while recognising the need for security and affordability for tenants in the private rented sector and respecting landlords’ property rights, declines to give a second reading to the renters’ rights bill because the bill fails to deliver those outcomes and will reduce the supply of housing in the private rented sector, forcing up rents and reducing choice for tenants, especially young people, because it proposes to remove section 21 of the Housing Act 1988 without ensuring that courts and tribunals can handle claims from renters and owners promptly and fairly, because it is not accompanied by a proper assessment of the cumulative impact of changes relating to energy efficiency regulation, advertising and rent arrears on costs and entry for new tenants and because the regulatory uncertainty will discourage institutional investment in the Build to Rent sector and undermine housebuilding.

In an article for the Daily Telegraph today she goes further, claiming it will bring in a form of rent control. She says:

Today Labour are bringing forward legislation that will wreck the rental market.

It will act as a powerful disincentive for anyone to rent out their property.

Instead of landlord and tenant freely entering into a contract they can renew when the terms expire, all tenancies will continue indefinitely until terminated by the tenant – there will be no more fixed-term tenancies.

If a landlord wants to recover possession of their property they will have to obtain a court order.

Worse than that, the landlord can only apply to get their own property back on the basis of a limited list of reasons.

What sort of market is it where you can’t decide what to do with your own property? This is a violation of the principle of freedom of contract.

Labour is also bringing in rent control through the back door, as judges will be able to determine a market rent instead of the law of supply and demand.

Bookmakers have cut the odds on Kemi Badenoch becoming next Tory leader because there has been a surge of money going her way in the last 24 hours, according to Oddschecker, a betting prize comparison website. Leon Blackman, a spokesperson for the firm, said:

Kemi Badenoch’s sudden surge in support has shaken up the Conservative leadership market. Within a day, her odds have been slashed from 6/1 to 6/4, as she takes the lion’s share of today’s bets. While Cleverly remains the favourite, his hold on the top spot looks increasingly precarious.

Blackman said Cleverly’s odds are 6/5, and Robert Jenrick is the outsider at 7/2.

Updated

Danny Kruger, Robert Jenrick’s campaign manager, told Times Radio this morning that he thought Jenrick would make the final shortlist, Aubrey Allegretti reports.

“It looks like James [Cleverly] will get through” to the final two, says Tory MP Danny Kruger, Robert Jenrick’s campaign manager.

He denies Jenrick going backwards is terminal, telling @TimesRadio “the numbers go up and down” and Cleverly “flatlined” in the second round.

Bernard Jenkin, a former chair of the Commons liaison committee and a leading pro-Brexit Tory, has said that he is backing Kemi Badenoch for leader.

Any of the 3 @Conservatives leadership contenders wd be a credible leader. Until now, I have kept my counsel, but now I wish to make clear I will vote for @KemiBadenoch in today’s ballot. She has the most potential.

Late yesterday afternoon Downing Street announced a series of ministerial appointments to the Government Equalities Office. Four people who were already ministers will get an equalities portfolio in addition to their current ministerial roles. The timing of the announcement may have been related to the fact that it is women and equalities questions in the Commons this morning.

Seema Malhotra, a Home Office minister, and Nia Griffith, a Welsh Office minister, are have both been made equalities ministers too. And, in the Lords, Jacqui Smith, skills minister, and Ray Collins, deputy leader of the Lords and a Foreign Office minister, will be government spokespeople for equalities.

Ladbrokes, the betting firm, says this morning that Robert Jenrick is now the outsider in the contest, according to its odds. The company says he is “the 16/5 outsider in the three-horse race, with Kemi Badenoch (7/4) overtaking him in the last 24 hours” and James Cleverly the favourite, on evens.

Here are excerpts from three takes around this morning on what will happen in the Tory leadership ballot this afternoon.

In a BBC article, Chris Mason, the BBC’s political editor, says Robert Jenrick’s supporters claim they are confident of making the final two.

It may not seem like a big number, but 20 is one heck of a lot in an electorate of 121.

“James is an irrelevance now. It’s all now a battle between us and Kemi’s team,” said a Team Jenrick insider.

“Tom’s supporters are closer to our side than hers,” they added.

“We’ll be ahead in the end.”

It is a characteristic blast of confidence from Jenrick’s camp, who have exuded plenty of it throughout.

But there is no shortage of psychology in all of this too - and you might need a splash of outward confidence when you have just been knocked off top spot and managed to go backwards.

Giles Dilnot, the ConservativeHome editor, says in an article he does not expect vote lending to happen.

He’s military minded to his core, regardless of whether he went to Luton, not Basra. He’ll often cite tactical lessons from generals of the past over the politics of now.

So, instinctively, wise or not, he won’t try to influence who his opponent might end up being, to get into the last two. He will marshal his team and his tactics to be ready to tackle whomsoever MPs choose in a way that suits him, and his message.

Besides, I don’t see anyone able to lend votes to another candidate, there still aren’t enough to go around without risk. He will in essence face who he’s given – or bow out wondering how it all changed again so quickly.

And Robert Peston, the ITV political editor, says in a post on social media he expects Jenrick to fall out of the contest today.

The outcome depends largely on how Tugendhat’s released supporters break. Talking to some of them my expectation is maybe half go to Cleverly, who as I said earlier is a racing certainty to be one of the final two candidates for members to evaluate.

The others are mulling. But the way they talk fondly about Badenoch as the “high risk, high return” candidate suggests to me she will join Cleverly in the final round - and that the front runner till today, Robert Jenrick, will have had his chips.

Nigel Farage, the Reform UK leader, seems to agree with Robert Jenrick (see 9.35am) that Jenrick is at risk of losing out because of Tory MPs voting tactically against him. As the Telegraph reports, Farage told GB News:

Who makes the last two? Well, I tell you: Cleverly, clearly makes the last two. And in fact, you would expect, in policy and positioning terms, him to get many of the Tugendhat votes. So who makes it through between Jenrick on 31 and Badenoch on 30? Here is my guess.

My guess is that the Cleverly camp and the Conservative establishment will lend a few votes to Kemi Badenoch because they don’t want Jenrick - because Jenrick wants to do things like leave the ECHR, and that would never do.

So that’s my prediction. That’s what will happen. It’ll be Cleverly versus Badenoch.

Well, that’s one theory …

Updated

Last night Nick Timothy, who was one of the most powerful people in government when he was Theresa May’s co-chief of staff for almost a year until the 2017 election, said he was switching from Tom Tugendhat to Robert Jenrick.

I supported Tom Tugendhat for the Tory leadership until he was knocked out today. I will vote for Rob Jenrick tomorrow.

My party needs to be unsparing in its analysis of why we lost and what we must do next. Rob has shown his willingness to do that, so he has my full support.

And Caroline Dinenage declared last night she was backing James Cleverly.

Having carefully watched the leadership campaign unfold I concluded that @JamesCleverly is the right person to rebuild our party.

He has a wealth of experience and the ability to unite us with action, not just words, and restore trust.

He gets my vote

Iain Duncan Smith backs Badenoch for Tory leader

Kemi Badenoch has received a useful endoresement this morning. Iain Duncan Smith, a former party leader, posted a message on social media this morning saying he was backing her because she was capable of facing up to the “hard truths from that terrible election result”. He said:

As today is the last parliamentary round to decide the final two contenders, I think it’s right to say who I hope will become the next leader of the @Conservatives Party.

That person must be capable of returning the Party to its central values and core beliefs. Who recognises why millions of Conservative voters deserted us in July, feeling that the Party in government was no longer behaving like the one they voted for overwhelmingly in 2019.

The individual who does not reach for the default easy comfort blanket of our past achievements but faces up to the hard truths from that terrible election result, and has the humility to learn from it as well as the strength to do something about it.

Most of all, the individual who is not just the right person for today, but who can grow with the Party over the next five years, so that by 2029 the electorate will be able to see what has been achieved, that the Conservative Party has completed its journey of repair and offers a real alternative to this dysfunctional Labour government, and once again is fit to govern.

I believe that person to be @KemiBadenoch and I shall be voting for her today.

The line about not reaching for the “default easy comfort blanket of our past achievements” is a clear jibe at James Cleverly, who has been talking most about what the Tories achieved in office, and arguably least about how they should change going ahead.

Jenrick suggests he is victim of 'horse trading' as MPs prepare to choose final two leadership candidates for members' ballot

Good morning. Keir Starmer is taking PMQs today, for the first time since the conference season recess and the internal No 10 reshuffle that saw his chief of staff, Sue Gray, in effect sacked. But there may be even more interest in what Bob Blackman, chair of the Conservative 1922 Committee, has to say at 3.30pm, when he announces the names of the two Tory leadership candidates who will go to the ballot of members.

One of them is about 99.999% certain to be James Cleverly. The other will be either Kemi Badenoch or Robert Jenrick. They are both candidates for the Tory right, but Badenoch is a lifelong, conviction rightwinger, very popular with Tory members, while Jenrick is someone elected to parliament as a Cameroon moderniser who says he has been radicalised into favouring ECHR withdrawal by his experience in a Home Office unable to control irregular migration.

Until the Tory conference, Jenrick was the clear bookmakers’ favourite. But today he is the candidate struggling the most.

Jenrick was only one vote ahead of Badenoch yesterday and no one is confident about predicting what will happen today. That is because Tory MPs are not just voting for who they want to be leader. They are voting for who they want to be in the final two (mindful of who they want as leader), and who they don’t want in the final two (because stopping the candidate they hate often matters more than backing the person they like).

In a last minute attempt to win over some extra votes, Jenrick gave an interview to Kay Burley on Sky News this morning. (Badenoch’s team probably decided that the thing most likely to help her campaign would be keeping her off the media – she often finds it hard to get through an interview without patronising or arguing with the presenter in a manner that reinforces claims she’s divisive and abrasive.) When Burley asked Jenrick why Cleverly did so well yesterday, Jenrick implied that he was the vicitm of "horse trading” by MPs swapping votes to keep him out. He replied:

There’s always horse trading, OK, in the final stages ….

I’ve been around long enough to know that in the last few votes in these leadership contests there’s always people moving around votes and so on.

When Burley asked if he was implying that the Badenoch camp was lending votes to Cleverly, to keep Jenrick off the final shortlist, Jenrick replied: “I don’t know.”

Neither do we, and perhaps we never will. Strategic vote swapping does happen in ballots like this, but people almost never admit it, and it can be risky. And, while sometimes it involves the campaign manager of the candidate in the lead actively asking a handful of supporters to vote for the weaker opponent, it can just involve MPs freelancing. Around half of Tory MPs have not declared publicly who they are supporting, and some of them will be keeping that information private even from colleagues.

But if there is vote swapping happening today, Jenrick is more likely to be the beneficiary than the victim. The most recent survey of Tory members suggest Badenoch would beat Cleverly in the final ballot, but Jenrick wouldn’t, and so the Cleverly team (the only ones theoretically with spare votes to divvy up) have an incentive to get Jenrick over the line.

In his interview, Jenrick also claimed that he would move the Tories back onto the “common ground” of British politics – a pitch to the centre designed to appeal to the 20 Tory MPs who voted yesterday for Tom Tugendhat, who is now eliminated. Jenrick said:

In this leadership contest over the last few months I think I’ve been the only candidate who has set out specific, clear policies to tackle the big issues facing our country – the NHS, how do we grow the economy, how do we tackle immigration, secure our borders

Because I think it’s so important that the Conservative party gets back onto the common ground of British politics, addressing the things that the public really care about.

And the polling suggests that, of the candidates, I am the best placed to win back the millions of votes to we lost to Reform, and the votes to be lost on our left to the Lib Dems.

If we don’t do that, then there’s no future for our party, and we will be stuck in the political wilderness for years to come.

So the party needs now somebody who is professional, who’s competent, and is focused on the most salient issues, the things that your viewers really care about. That is me. That’s what I want to do for the Conservative party.

Here is the agenda for the day.

11.30am: Bridget Phillipson takes questions in the Commons in her capacity as minister for women and equalities.

Noon: Keir Starmer faces Rishi Sunak at PMQs.

After 12.30pm: Angela Rayner, the deputy PM and housing secretary, opens the second reading of the renters’ rights bill.

1.30pm: Tory MPs start voing in the final parliamentary ballot in the Tory leadership contest.

3.30pm: Bob Blackman, chair of the 1922 Committee, announces the results of the Tory leadership ballot.

Also, David Lammy, the foreign secretary, is in the Middle East, visiting Bahrain and Jordan.

If you want to contact me, please post a message below the line (BTL) or message me on social media. I can’t read all the messages BTL, but if you put “Andrew” in a message aimed at me, I am more likely to see it because I search for posts containing that word.

If you want to flag something up urgently, it is best to use social media. I’m still using X and I’ll see something addressed to @AndrewSparrow very quickly. I’m also trying Bluesky (@andrewsparrowgdn) and Threads (@andrewsparrowtheguardian).

I find it very helpful when readers point out mistakes, even minor typos (no error is too small to correct). And I find your questions very interesting too. I can’t promise to reply to them all, but I will try to reply to as many as I can, either BTL or sometimes in the blog.

Updated

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100’s of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
“She Had A Nose Job”: Salma Hayek’s 1995 Casting Photo Goes Viral
A Polaroid photo shows Salma years before her breakout role as the famous Mexican painter in "Frida." The post “She Had A Nose Job”: Salma Hayek’s 1995 Casting Photo Goes Viral first appeared on Bored Panda.
Bored Panda
Bored Panda
Boozy or not, that leftover eggnog makes a great milkshake
By now you may have found uses for many of the holiday leftovers
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
Why you shouldn’t bother budgeting
With the new year approaching, people may be looking to reorganize their finances. Brittany Miller writes about how one of the best money tips might be to avoid budgeting altogether
The Independent UK
The Independent UK
All I want for Christmas is $1.22bn: Mega Millions ticket matches all six numbers
Circle K in Cottonwood, California, where ticket was sold celebrates $1m bonus as winner remains unknown
The Guardian - US
The Guardian - US
How ‘sad’ bananas could help tackle food waste
Bananas are a sociable fruit. They thrive in bunches, bound by a unifying stalk which joins them happily together in curvy yellow brightness.
The Conversation
The Conversation
Most restaurants don’t make it. Here’s how Jean-Georges restaurants have survived the test of time—and even a pandemic
Legendary chef Jean-Georges Vongerichten also tells young hopefuls that if they can’t handle 14-hour days, the chef life is ‘not for you’.
Fortune
Fortune
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.
Download on the AppStore Get it on Google Play