Kemi Badenoch devoted all of her questions at PMQs this afternoon to the Conservative Party’s demand for a national public inquiry into child sexual exploitation.
In her final commons tussle with the prime minister before the local elections on Thursday, Badenoch began by referring to the recent comments of Jess Phillips, the safeguarding minister.
“The prime minister’s safeguarding minister admitted on the floor of the House that there was a cover up of the child rape gang scandal”, the Conservative leader declared.
“Does the prime minister think we should expose this cover up?”
Responding, Keir Starmer said he oversaw the first grooming gang prosecution in his previous role as director of public prosecutions (DPP), and accused Badenoch of never raising the issue in the commons “in three years” while she was the equalities minister.
The exchange that then unfolded followed a familiar pattern: Badenoch blasted Starmer for refusing to acquiesce to Conservative demands for an inquiry — weaving in some unsubtle suggestions Labour is complicit in a wider “cover up”. Starmer scolded Badenoch for her record in government and alleged lack of action on the issue. He referred repeatedly to his tenure as DPP. So did Badenoch; she seemed less impressed.
Both Starmer and Badenoch’s closing lines reflect how little ground was covered in the full six-question, six-answer session. Tying in the local elections, the Tory leader concluded: “Isn’t the choice tomorrow between chaos and cover-ups under Labour councils or better services under the Conservatives?”
Starmer’s response was, by the standards of his pre-scripted PMQs perorations, pretty meek. He noted: “Tomorrow is the first opportunity the country has to pass their verdict on the Leader of the Opposition and the party opposite after the general election… we will see her next week.”
***Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.***
With Westminster all a quiver today after Tony Blair’s net zero intervention, Badenoch’s decision to foreground the grooming scandal— as her final local elections pitch — is already facing some scrutiny.
Blair’s comments are politically notable because they play into Reform and Tory attack lines on the government’s climate strategy. The Conservative Party appeared to show some cognisance of this fact yesterday, when central office put a press release together welcoming the intervention.
In a gleeful press notice, acting shadow energy secretary Andrew Bowie ridiculed “Ed Miliband’s net zero zealotry” and urged Starmer to follow the Conservative interpretation of Blair’s advice. Ditch the “ideological dogma”, Bowie demanded of the government.
The timing of Blair’s intervention is perplexing and potentially damaging. Badenoch, of course, has been a vocal critic of the government’s net zero drive: as a minister, as a leadership candidate, and as Conservative leader.
But Badenoch did not direct her attention to Labour’s most obvious bruise today.
The perplexing nature of Blair’s intervention is only rivalled by Badenoch’s decision to ignore it this afternoon.
For what it is worth, Badenoch was strong on the substance of her questioning. But she has had plenty of practice, having scrutinised Starmer on these exact points — using the same framing — on several occasions since January. For the same reason, the prime minister’s comebacks were at least passable.
When the Tory party suffers significant losses in the local elections tomorrow, it will not be because of Badenoch’s performance today. But for those Conservatives whose patience Badenoch is testing, this latest spurned opportunity to highlight Labour’s woes — on the eve of an electoral cataclysm — will be noted as such.
It was left to Sammy Wilson, the DUP chief whip, to ask Starmer about Blair’s climate broadside. Predictably, the prime minister’s response has won headlines as the latest natural development in this untimely Labour Party debate.
Ed Davey used his questions to probe the prime minister on two topics the Lib Dems have emphasised repeatedly this parliament: Donald Trump and mental health. For some readers, these topics could well be linked — but for Davey they represent distinct lines of attack.
The Liberal Democrat leader secured a pointed non-denial from Starmer on the question of whether parliament will be granted a vote on any US-UK trade deal. That secures headlines today and additional lines of inquiry for future sessions. This is the process whereby leaders build credibility at PMQs. The Conservative Party should take notes.
Nigel Farage caught the speaker’s eye today. The Reform leader is outnumbered in the commons; but that means his fishing for a social media soundbite is usually successful.
The Reform UK leader asked: “Is it not time to admit that ‘smash the gangs’ was nothing more than an election slogan, not a policy? And isn’t it time to declare a national emergency and to act accordingly?”
Starmer’s response was scattergun: a simultaneous, all-encompassing exposition of the Labour’s Reform criticisms. In a cacophony of rhetoric, the prime minister commented: “Did they support those extra measures to actually smash the gangs? No, they went in the lobby with this lot [the Conservatives] in their new coalition to vote against them.
“And let’s be clear what a vote for his party means. It’s a vote to charge for the NHS. It means a pro-Putin foreign policy. And a vote against workers’ rights.
“And now we hear Mr Speaker, he’s recruited Liz Truss as his new top adviser.”
Starmer closed by referencing Farage’s support for the former prime minister’s mini-budget. That, of the six tactics the prime minister deployed in this single answer, was by far the most convincing and potent. Perhaps he should focus on augmenting this argument in the time it takes Farage to return to the commons chamber.
Roll on the local elections.
Josh Self is Editor of Politics.co.uk, follow him on Bluesky here.
Politics.co.uk is the UK’s leading digital-only political website. Subscribe to our daily newsletter for all the latest news and analysis.
