For anyone but die-hard Faragists, criticism of the rapidly-evolving Reform UK top table is inevitable. To political opponents, the latest appointments and defections are either ‘far-right’, Tory 2.0, ‘fascists’ or simply ‘traitors’. To the Reform party faithful, there are more nuanced charges to answer: are Zia Yusuf and Laila Cunningham genuinely worthy of their prominent positions, or is their label as ‘moderate Muslims’ a mediating factor? Is Nadhim Zahawi’s wealth of experience enough to offset his tax scandals, his push for child vaccinations against parental wishes, and his former pro-immigration stance? Is Robert Jenrick a true believer, or did he merely jump ship after he was pushed? Indeed, were Farage to unveil Thatcher, Churchill and Disraeli in matching turquoise jumpsuits at the same press conference, I suspect he’d be accused of pandering to identity politics, drunkards and greasy pole climbers.
Yet amid this scrutiny of Reform’s recruits, the defection of Suella Braverman stands apart. In my opinion, she is likely to add several percentage points to Reform’s vote share immediately – not through any sudden mass conversion, but by crystallising the disillusionment among the Conservative base that has been building since the 2024 wipeout. There is tentative evidence to support this, for instance a recent YouGov poll suggesting that around a quarter of 2024 Tory voters now view Reform more favourably following the Braverman and Jenrick defections. Furthermore, Rishi Sunak’s sacking of Braverman back in November 2023 coincided with a sharp rise in the Reform vote.
Those who ‘switch sides’ in any walk of life can expect a degree of censure, but political defections are almost impossible to pull off without violent condemnation. For we ask a great deal of our politicians: loyalty to country, to party, to a manifesto they likely had little or no hand in drafting, and above all to principle – even when many if not all of those things are unaligned. Few of us would satisfy such a test in any 24-hour period. Braverman, however – a paid-up Conservative for the best part of thirty years – might just make the grade.
It was she, after all, who stood firm against the pro-Palestine “hate marches” sullying the streets of London; she was one of the first to speak out about the net-zero dogma that burdens ordinary families, and the need to leave the ECHR; she did everything she could to tighten up an immigration system she described as “an invasion”, and to correct the Metropolitan Police’s shameful two-tier policing. In her re-election speech in 2024, she even had the grace to apologise to the British people – something rarer than hen’s teeth in Westminster:
“I want to briefly address the results around the country, and there’s only one thing I can say… sorry. I’m sorry. The Great British people voted for us over 14 years and we did not keep our promises…we acted like we were entitled to your votes”
When a politician is sacked from the same high office twice in as many years by different Prime Ministers, it is tempting to infer that they are simply not up to the job. The alternative explanation, which I suspect is far closer to the truth, is that Suella was being actively impeded from doing hers. Braverman’s record as Home Secretary – pushing for tougher border controls, confronting cultural threats head-on – clashed repeatedly with the cautious centrism that has defined recent Conservative leadership. Her departures from government were less about personal failure than about a party unwilling to confront hard realities – particularly those for which they must assume the lion’s share of responsibility.
The manner of the Braverman defection tells its own story. Announced at a Veterans for Reform event earlier this week, it felt less like a calculated political manoeuvre and more like a genuine homecoming. Suella’s words, “I feel like I’ve come home” were delivered with visible emotion, and met with warmth and applause from the room. Contrast that with Robert Jenrick’s heckled unveiling, or Nadhim Zahawi’s dismissal of legitimate questions about Covid vaccines as “stupid”. Braverman’s reception suggests something deeper: a sense among Reform supporters that one of their own had finally returned.
The Conservative Party response was equally revealing, and far uglier. Within hours of Braverman’s defection, an official statement read “It was always a matter of when, not if, Suella would defect. The Conservatives did all we could to look after Suella’s mental health, but she was clearly very unhappy.” Naturally this was swiftly retracted as a “draft put out in error”, but the damage had been done. Badenoch further compounded the matter by describing defectors as “drama queens” throwing tantrums “dressed up as politics”. Such venom betrays panic rather than confidence. And it is precisely this dismissal of common conservative concerns which defined the last 14 years of Tory demise.
Two questions now loom large. First, who follows Braverman? Just a fortnight ago, the Tories had placed 11 of their MPs on a ‘defection watchlist’. Prominent among them is rising star and Jenrick ally, Katie Lam, who spoke out eloquently against the Labour inertia on grooming gangs; GB News favourite, Esther McVey; and veteran right-wingers Sir John Hayes, Mark Francois, and Sir Desmond Swayne.
Second, what is to become of the Conservative Party? While often speculated over, a full merger with Reform is now unthinkable. Such a move would spell disaster for Farage: necessitating import of the Tory ‘wets’, and saddling the party with responsibility for 14 years of failure. Some kind of realignment on the right was always inevitable, but it need not mean absorption. Reform, bolstered by figures like Braverman who command respect on security and sovereignty, could instead emerge as the authentic home for unapologetic conservatism. What remains of the Conservative Party could always consider a merger with the LibDems – assuming they can stomach the move rightward.
While one should be cautious in overstating the matter, Braverman’s embrace of Reform is no mere defection. The Tories, hollowed out and dominated by those unwilling to fight the battles their voters demand, risk becoming the walking dead of British politics. Braverman’s homecoming may just herald a renaissance for the right. The dam has cracked – will it hold, or will the floodwaters reshape British politics entirely?
Frank Haviland is the author of Banalysis: The Lie Destroying the West and The Frank Report, which you should probably subscribe to.
An excerpt from this piece was first published in The European Conservative.
If you enjoy The New Conservative and would like to support our work, please consider buying us a coffee – it would really help to keep us going. Thank you!
(Photograph: Laurie Noble, CC BY 3.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0>, via Wikimedia Commons)
No, there us nothing worth saving and after impending electoral annihilation of all the old parties, then all the usual suspects will either band together to form something ‘new’, despite having allegedly nothing politically in common, or seek admittance to Reform (and get it as NF can’t read the room).
Too many Tories responsible for the current mess have hopped to Reform. And Farage is quite clueless when it comes to wider economic policies. Even worse, he surrounds himself with dullards. He would be an awful PM and he certainly could not solve the country’s problems with his team. I cannot see Farage getting any better – or his team improving. He is a one issue bloke – great for Brexit – but lost on the wider issues – one reason, I suspect, why he retired from politics after the Brexit vote was won – he knew his own inadequacies then.
Disillusioned UKIP, Brexit and ex-Reform Supporter.
As another disillusioned UKIP, Brexit and Reform supporter, these are also exactly my concerns. Mr F is a superb public speaker and natural performer, but his organisational, tactical and PR skills and those of his current, rather arrogant and autocratic, party seem to lag a little behind. One can see his/its, increasingly urgent, need to build a strong ‘front bench’ team for potential government, but many of his/its choices, Ms B excepted, seem slightly desperate and worrying. The centre-right is notorious for its internecine factionalism based on excessive individualism, and better political balance is needed.
Agree what we need is Rupert Lowe about the only sensible person in the whole of Westminster.
Perhaps those on the watchlist are waiting to see the outcome of the May council election results to decide whether to jump or not. A Tory rout may provide them with the excuse to jump.
The truth always hurts Frank I think Suella Braverman will be a great asset to Reform and is one of the reasons I would vote Reform I have little trust in Farage and have joined Advance as I think Ben Habib has good ideas on how a political party should be run No more striking personalities but I do not think Advance will be strong enough at the next elections so Reform will have to fill the gap.