Kemi has steadied Tory ship commendably, writes Leo McKinstry. (Image: Express / Getty)
Kemi Badenoch has given the Conservative Party something it desperately needed after its disastrous 2024 general election defeat: a clearer sense of purpose. But her latest declaration could prove even more significant than her efforts to restore confidence among Tory MPs and activists. By ruling out an electoral pact with Nigel Farage and Reform UK, Badenoch is drawing a firm dividing line between the Conservatives and their increasingly formidable rivals on the right.
For months, the question hanging over the Conservative Party has been whether it can survive without joining forces with Reform. Some critics have argued that the two parties share enough voters and political priorities to make cooperation inevitable. Badenoch has now rejected that argument, insisting that her party must win back public trust on its own terms rather than surrender its identity to Farage.
That stance is a gamble. Reform remains a serious competitor, and the Conservatives are still recovering from years of political turmoil and public dissatisfaction. Yet Badenoch appears to believe that a clear alternative to Reform could ultimately be more valuable than an agreement designed to avoid splitting the right-wing vote.
Her pledge will not automatically damage Farage. But it creates a challenge he cannot easily dismiss: the Conservatives are attempting to reclaim voters who want tougher immigration policies, lower taxes and a smaller state without necessarily embracing Reform’s political style or its entire agenda.
From political crisis to renewed confidence
The scale of the Conservatives’ 2024 defeat left the party facing an existential question. After years in government, the Tories lost power amid widespread frustration over the economy, public services, immigration and repeated episodes of political instability.
Badenoch inherited a party whose reputation had been badly damaged. Her leadership initially attracted scrutiny, with questions about her media performances, parliamentary effectiveness and ability to unite a fractured parliamentary party.
The threat of internal rebellion added to the uncertainty. Robert Jenrick, once a prominent Conservative figure, eventually left for Reform UK, underlining how difficult it would be for Badenoch to prevent dissatisfied Conservatives from defecting to Farage’s movement.
However, the leadership crisis has gradually become less central to the party’s immediate concerns. Badenoch has developed a more assured public presence and a sharper parliamentary style. Her supporters argue that she is increasingly willing to challenge opponents directly rather than allow the Conservatives to remain trapped in defensive explanations of their past.
That improvement matters, but it should not be confused with a complete political recovery. The party still faces difficult polling and must persuade voters that it has genuinely learned from its previous time in office.
As political commentator Lord Ashcroft warned in the source article, voters may like Badenoch personally while remaining unconvinced by the wider Conservative organisation. That is the central challenge confronting her: turning an improving leadership image into renewed support for the party itself.
The pledge that draws a line under a possible deal with Farage
Badenoch’s refusal to enter a pact with Reform is important because it addresses one of the most persistent questions in British right-wing politics.
Reform has benefited from dissatisfaction with the established parties, attracting voters who believe the Conservatives failed to deliver on promises relating to immigration, public spending and national sovereignty. Some former Conservative politicians have also moved to Farage’s party, arguing that it offers a more decisive break with the political establishment.
A formal alliance might appear attractive to those who believe the right cannot win unless its votes are combined. In constituencies where Conservative and Reform candidates compete for similar voters, splitting that support could make it easier for another party to win.
But an agreement would also carry considerable risks. It could force the Conservatives to accept Reform’s priorities, compromise their own candidates and leave Badenoch appearing dependent on a rival she is supposed to challenge.
Her position is that the Conservatives must demonstrate why voters should choose them, rather than simply negotiate with Farage in the hope of securing power.
The distinction is strategic as well as ideological. Badenoch is effectively telling Conservative supporters that the party intends to rebuild as an independent political force, not as a junior partner waiting for Reform to dictate the terms.
Recent coverage of the Conservative conference has highlighted this separation, with Badenoch criticising Reform and rejecting the prospect of a deal. Sky News reported that her conference speech included both her inheritance-tax pledge and a clear message that she would not team up with Farage.
For Reform, that means the Conservatives are not offering an easy route to political influence through an alliance. Farage must either continue competing with them or persuade enough former Tory voters that Reform can replace the party altogether.
Why Reform should take the challenge seriously
Badenoch’s position could threaten Reform’s long-term ambitions if the Conservatives successfully recover some of the voters who have moved away from them.
Reform’s appeal rests partly on the belief that traditional Conservative politicians cannot be trusted to deliver the changes they promise. The party has presented itself as an alternative to a political establishment it portrays as disconnected from ordinary voters.
That message is powerful precisely because the Conservatives spent years in government. Promises made by Badenoch will inevitably be judged against the record of previous Conservative administrations, including their handling of immigration and public finances.
Yet Reform faces its own challenge. Winning support as a protest movement is not the same as demonstrating that a party can govern effectively. Questions about candidate selection, internal discipline, donations and the practical details of policy can become more consequential as a party moves closer to power.
Badenoch can exploit those questions by arguing that voters should judge parties not only by the strength of their rhetoric but also by the credibility of their plans.
Her argument is not necessarily that every Reform supporter is wrong. Rather, it is that voters who want change should not assume that Farage’s party is the only available vehicle.
That message could resonate with people who are dissatisfied with the Conservatives but remain uncertain about whether Reform has the organisation, experience and policy detail needed to run the country.
However, the danger for Badenoch is obvious. If she attacks Reform too aggressively without offering convincing alternatives, she could reinforce the impression that the Conservatives are more interested in fighting their opponents than addressing the concerns that drove voters away.
A tax pledge designed to reconnect with homeowners
Badenoch’s economic message is another important part of her attempt to distinguish the Conservatives from both Reform and Labour.
At the party’s Birmingham conference, she pledged to abolish inheritance tax on family homes if the Conservatives win the next general election. She also proposed allowing couples to pass on an additional £1 million tax-free under the plan.
The promise is intended to appeal to families who have worked for decades to buy a home and want to pass that asset to their children. For Badenoch, it supports a broader argument that people should retain more of what they earn and save rather than face additional taxation when transferring wealth between generations.
According to Reuters, Badenoch presented the proposal as part of a wider Conservative commitment to home ownership and lower taxes.
The policy could give her party a recognisable message on an issue that many voters find emotionally significant. A family home is not simply an investment; it can represent years of mortgage payments, sacrifice and financial planning.
But the proposal is not without controversy. Inheritance tax affects a minority of estates, and critics argue that changes could disproportionately benefit households with valuable property. Any reduction in revenue would also have to be reconciled with commitments on public services, defence and the national debt.
Labour can therefore challenge the Conservatives to explain how the policy would be funded and who would benefit most.
Badenoch’s response is likely to centre on aspiration, ownership and the principle that families should have greater control over assets they have accumulated. Whether that argument persuades undecided voters will depend partly on whether she can demonstrate that the wider economic consequences have been properly considered.
The battle over what conservatism means
The deeper contest between Badenoch and Farage is about the future of the political right.
Reform has built its identity around challenging the established political order. Its supporters often see the party as a vehicle for a more radical break with current policy, particularly on immigration and the role of government.
Badenoch is attempting to offer a different kind of conservatism: lower taxation, stronger defence, restrained government and an emphasis on personal responsibility. Her conference message, described as the “Right Way”, seeks to present these ideas as a coherent programme rather than a collection of reactions to Labour.
The approach echoes previous Conservative efforts to combine economic liberalism with appeals to common sense and national confidence. But history also offers a warning. A strong conference speech can energise activists without necessarily changing the minds of voters who have already lost faith in the party.
The Conservatives must prove that their proposed policies can be implemented, that spending commitments are affordable and that the party has learned from its previous failures.
They also need to persuade voters that they can deliver competent government, not merely articulate attractive principles.
The polling problem has not disappeared
For all the renewed confidence surrounding Badenoch, the electoral arithmetic remains difficult.
Recent polling has continued to show a competitive contest among Labour, Reform and the Conservatives, with the precise standings varying between pollsters. An Opinium poll published in October 2026 showed a modest improvement in Conservative support, but the party still faced a substantial task in rebuilding its national position.
That is why Badenoch’s refusal to pursue a pact is both a statement of confidence and a significant risk.
If the Conservatives recover, she can argue that voters are prepared to return to a party that offers a clear programme and credible leadership. If they continue to struggle while Reform maintains strong support, opponents will argue that rejecting cooperation has made it harder for the right to win seats.
There is also no guarantee that voters who leave Reform will automatically return to the Conservatives. Some may choose Labour, the Liberal Democrats or the Greens, while others may abstain altogether.
Badenoch therefore needs more than a message about Farage. She needs a practical programme that speaks to the cost of living, housing, public services, employment and immigration, backed by evidence that the Conservatives can deliver it.
A credible pledge, but not yet a political victory
The significance of Badenoch’s declaration lies in its clarity. She has rejected the idea that the Conservatives should organise their future around a possible agreement with Reform and instead insists that her party must rebuild its own credibility.
That may be the right decision for a leader who wants to preserve the Conservatives as an independent political force. It could also help distinguish the party from Reform among voters who want lower taxes and stricter controls but are uncomfortable with aspects of Farage’s movement.
Nevertheless, the pledge alone will not terrify Reform into retreat. Farage retains a political platform, an established voter base and the ability to present himself as an outsider challenging the establishment.
Badenoch’s task is more demanding than simply drawing a line between the two parties. She must demonstrate that the Conservatives can offer something voters cannot find elsewhere: a credible economic plan, competent leadership and policies that address the country’s problems without relying on slogans.
If she succeeds, Reform could face a more formidable Conservative rival than it has encountered since the 2024 election. If she fails, the refusal to make a pact may become a symbol of political isolation rather than independence.
For now, Badenoch has made her choice. She intends to fight Farage for the future of the right rather than negotiate it away. The next stage will determine whether that confidence marks the beginning of a genuine Conservative recovery—or simply another ambitious promise in a party still struggling to win back public trust.