Kaminski ties continue to shame the Tories

The party's dishonesty is doing it no favours

The questions over the Tories' sinister European alliance just won't go away. William Hague and David Miliband's tête-à-tête on the Today programme this morning has placed the party's relationship with the Polish MEP Michal Kaminski under new scrutiny.

At the centre of the debate are the comments first made about Kaminski by the Chief Rabbi of Poland, Michael Schudrich, to my colleague James Macintyre. In his original email, which can be read in full here, he said:

[I]t is clear that Mr Kaminski was a member of NOP, a group that is openly far-right and neo-Nazi. Anyone who would want to align himself with a person who was an active member of NOP and the Committee to Defend the Good Name of Jedwabne (which was established to deny historical facts of the massacre at Jedwabne) needs to understand with what and by whom he is being represented.

Today has now published an email sent by Schudrich to Policy Exchange in which he appears to perform a U-turn:

It is a grotesque distortion that people are quoting me to prove that Kaminski is an anti-Semite. Portraying Kaminski as a neo-Nazi plays into the painful and false stereotype that all Poles are anti-Semitic.

The Tories are now citing this email as evidence that Jewish concerns about Kaminski were exaggerated and even fabricated. Yet the fact remains that Schudrich has never retracted his original comments to James. The Observer's Toby Helm recently emailed the Chief Rabbi, who confirmed that he had no plans to disown his initial statement.

But more significantly, he reveals: "What I understand is that Schudrich has been under the most enormous pressure from the highest authorities in Poland to retract the remarks, but has refused to do so."

At the very least Schudrich's original email raised profound concerns over the Conservatives' political morality.

One point that cannot be made often enough is that Kaminski is not a lone maverick or an obscure backbencher; he is the leader of the Conservatives' European coalition. Right-wingers who highlight the odd cranky figure in the Party of European Socialists are not engaging in a like-for-like comparison.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.

Getty
Show Hide image

How Theresa May laid a trap for herself on the immigration target

When Home Secretary, she insisted on keeping foreign students in the figures – causing a headache for herself today.

When Home Secretary, Theresa May insisted that foreign students should continue to be counted in the overall immigration figures. Some cabinet colleagues, including then Business Secretary Vince Cable and Chancellor George Osborne wanted to reverse this. It was economically illiterate. Current ministers, like the Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, Chancellor Philip Hammond and Home Secretary Amber Rudd, also want foreign students exempted from the total.

David Cameron’s government aimed to cut immigration figures – including overseas students in that aim meant trying to limit one of the UK’s crucial financial resources. They are worth £25bn to the UK economy, and their fees make up 14 per cent of total university income. And the impact is not just financial – welcoming foreign students is diplomatically and culturally key to Britain’s reputation and its relationship with the rest of the world too. Even more important now Brexit is on its way.

But they stayed in the figures – a situation that, along with counterproductive visa restrictions also introduced by May’s old department, put a lot of foreign students off studying here. For example, there has been a 44 per cent decrease in the number of Indian students coming to Britain to study in the last five years.

Now May’s stubbornness on the migration figures appears to have caught up with her. The Times has revealed that the Prime Minister is ready to “soften her longstanding opposition to taking foreign students out of immigration totals”. It reports that she will offer to change the way the numbers are calculated.

Why the u-turn? No 10 says the concession is to ensure the Higher and Research Bill, key university legislation, can pass due to a Lords amendment urging the government not to count students as “long-term migrants” for “public policy purposes”.

But it will also be a factor in May’s manifesto pledge (and continuation of Cameron’s promise) to cut immigration to the “tens of thousands”. Until today, ministers had been unclear about whether this would be in the manifesto.

Now her u-turn on student figures is being seized upon by opposition parties as “massaging” the migration figures to meet her target. An accusation for which May only has herself, and her steadfast politicising of immigration, to blame.

Anoosh Chakelian is senior writer at the New Statesman.

0800 7318496