Introduction: A Conference That Feels Like a Goodbye and a Rebrand
The 2025 Conservative Party conference in Manchester has the tone of a wake more than a policy summit. With Kemi Badenoch at the helm, the party’s direction is being painted in stark, hard-edged strokes: a pledge to withdraw from the European convention on human rights, a climate policy bonfire, and a broader push to redefine Britain’s immigration stance. For many observers, it’s less about policy detail and more about what the party represents going forward—and what it has left behind.
Leaving the European Convention on Human Rights: A Bold, Controversial Pivot
Sunday’s keynote by Badenoch focused on a move that would realign Britain’s legal framework with a more stringent approach to rights and duties. The proposal to leave the European Convention on Human Rights has been described as controversial and, by many critics, dangerous to civil liberties. Yet Badenoch and her supporters argue it would offer a clearer framework for national sovereignty and security. The debate is less about a technical legal shift and more about a philosophical choice: should national interests trump supranational protections more often, and at what cost to individual rights?
The Road Ahead: What a “Rights Reform” Could Mean
Beyond the headlines, the plan signals a broader ambition: to reframe Britain’s balance between liberty, security, and economic pragmatism. If the party’s prior record on climate, social security, and immigration is any guide, the reforms would come with a promise of decisive action, even if the means are contentious. Critics warn of potential legal challenges and a chilling effect on vulnerable groups, while supporters insist that a steadier, more controlled approach is necessary in uncertain times.
The Climate Act and the Redefinition of Economic Priorities
The conference saw Badenoch’s willingness to challenge established policy landmarks, including the Climate Change Act. Critics ranged from former prime ministers to scientists and church leaders who described the move as “catastrophic.” Supporters argue that the Conservatives must recalibrate policy to reflect immediate economic realities, energy security, and the concerns of ordinary voters who feel let down by long-term targets that seem distant from daily life. The debate encapsulates a broader question: can a party popular for decades by promising steady stewardship navigate a shift toward a more aggressive reform agenda without alienating its core base?
The Immigration Debate and the “Removals” Proposal
In parallel, the conference spotlighted a hardline stance on immigration. The idea of a removals program, paired with a sharper critique of asylum and welfare provisions, underscores a push toward a more restricted, orderly immigration system. Critics warn of humanitarian and legal implications, while proponents argue that a controlled system is essential for social cohesion and public services under strain. The tension reveals a party wrestling with its identity: preserve a traditional sense of national sovereignty or adapt to a more cosmopolitan, global economy?
The Internal Dynamics: Leadership, Loyalty, and a Party in Transition
As Badenoch delivers a second leader’s speech—an unusual conference double act—the internal dynamics are on full display. With a reduced parliamentary footprint and a fragmented local landscape, the party’s future hinges on whether it can translate a hard-edged message into broad appeal. Behind the rhetoric, leadership rivals and factional loyalties surface in the form of whispered campaigns and public statements. The spectacle is less about policy detail and more about whether the party can reinvent itself without losing its historical base.
Conclusion: A Progressive Fight Don’t Fade Away
Britain’s political scene is shifting rightward in the wake of global populism and a changing media landscape. The Conservative party’s current trajectory—emphasizing sovereignty, border controls, and a skeptical stance toward climate policy—signals a regrouping rather than a restart. The true measure will be whether this rebranding translates into durable electoral support or further decline. The key question remains: in a party history defined by long periods of governing, can a hard-right pivot coexist with a sustainable, inclusive national project? For now, the 2025 conference reads like a house trying to fix its roof while the winds rise outside—urgent, divisive, and charged with a sense of unfinished business.
