reform

Zohran Mamdani, the progressive standard-bearer who could become New York City’s next mayor after Tuesday’s election, faces a public-safety trap that has entangled progressives nationwide: Voters want less cruelty, not less accountability. Confuse the two, and even progressives will vote you out.

Even before he has taken office, Mamdani is already fending off attacks from opponents, including former Gov. Andrew Cuomo and other political adversaries. They seek to brand him as a radical by tying him to the national Democratic Socialists of America’s most controversial criminal justice planks, such as declining to prosecute misdemeanor offenses.

Yet, in distancing himself from those specific policies, Mamdani is cleverly navigating a political minefield that has doomed other reformers. His strategy demonstrates a crucial lesson for the broader progressive movement: voters want a less inhumane justice system, not one that is unenforced. If progressives are perceived as abandoning accountability for offenses like shoplifting and public drug usage, they invite a political backlash that will not only cost them elections (or reelections) but also set back the cause of reform nationwide.

Americans across the political spectrum support reducing extremely harsh punishments. They want shorter sentences, alternatives to incarceration and rehabilitation over punishment. The moral case against excessive punishment resonates with voters who see our system as unnecessarily cruel. The evidence is overwhelming: 81% of Americans believe the U.S. criminal justice system needs reform, and 85% agree the main goal of our criminal justice system should be rehabilitation.

But when it comes to deciding which behaviors deserve prosecution, the politics shift dramatically. Mamdani has previously aligned with the Democratic Socialists of America, an organization that calls for ending the enforcement of some misdemeanor offenses.

This is precisely the kind of stance that can trigger backlash. The 2022 recall of San Francisco’s progressive district attorney shows why. About 1 in 3 “progressive” voters cast a ballot to remove the progressive DA from office. It wasn’t because they disagreed with his policies; in fact, these same voters supported his specific reforms when his name wasn’t attached to them. Their opposition was rooted in a fear that declining to prosecute low-level crimes would create a deterrence vacuum and incentivize lawlessness.

In Los Angeles, George Gascón’s trajectory offers a cautionary tale. As Los Angeles County district attorney, he survived two recall attempts before losing his 2024 reelection bid by 23 points. L.A. voters hadn’t abandoned reform — they’d supported it just four years earlier. But Gascón’s categorical bans on seeking certain harsher sentences or charging juveniles as adults triggered a revolt from his own rank-and-file prosecutors, creating the perception that entire categories of misconduct would go unaddressed. When prosecutors publicly sued him, arguing his directives violated state law, the deterrence vacuum became tangible. By the time Gascón walked back some policies, voters’ trust had evaporated.

This pattern repeats across the country. In Boston, DA Kevin Hayden has distanced himself so forcefully from predecessor Rachael Rollins’ “do not prosecute” list that he bristles at reporters even mentioning it. Yet Hayden’s office is still diverting first-time shoplifters to treatment programs — the same approach Rollins advocated. The difference? Hayden emphasizes prosecution of repeat offenders while offering alternatives to first-timers. The policy is nearly identical; the politics couldn’t be more different.

Critics are right to argue that the old model of misdemeanor prosecution was a failure. It criminalized poverty and addiction, clogged our courts and did little to stop the revolving door. But the answer to a broken system is not to create a vacuum of enforcement; it is to build a new system that pairs accountability with effective intervention.

Mamdani has already shown political wisdom by declaring, “I am not defunding the police.” But the issue isn’t just about police funding — it’s about what behaviors the criminal justice system will address. As mayor, Mamdani would not control whether the prosecutors abandon prosecution of misdemeanors, but what matters are his stances and voters’ perception. He should be vocal about how we thinks prosecutors should respond to low-level offenses:

• First-time shoplifters: Restitution or community service.
• Drug possession: Treatment enrollment, not incarceration.
• Quality-of-life violations: Social service interventions for housing and health.
• DUI offenders: Intensive supervision and treatment.

To be clear, this isn’t about ignoring these offenses; it’s about transforming the response. For this to work, the justice system must use its inherent leverage. Instead of compelling jail time, a pending criminal case becomes the tool to ensure a person completes a treatment program, pays restitution to the store they stole from, or connects with housing services. This is the essence of diversion: Accountability is met, the underlying problem is addressed, and upon successful completion, the case is often dismissed, allowing the person to move forward without the lifelong burden of a criminal record.

Mamdani’s proposed Department of Community Safety is a step in the right direction. But it must work alongside, not instead of, prosecution for lower-level offenses, and Mamdani must frame it as a partner to prosecution. If voters perceive it as a substitute for accountability, his opponents will use it as a political weapon the moment crime rates fluctuate.

New York deserves bold criminal justice reform. But boldness without pragmatism leads to backlash that sets the entire movement back. The future of the criminal justice progressive movement in America will not be determined by its ideals, but by its ability to deliver pragmatic safety. For the aspiring mayor, and for prosecutors in California and beyond, this means understanding that residents want both order and compassionate justice.

Dvir Yogev is a postdoctoral researcher at the Criminal Law & Justice Center at UC Berkeley, where he studies the politics of criminal justice reform and prosecutor elections.

Political Landscape & Key Contenders

Tanzania’s ruling Party of the Revolution (CCM) has dominated the country’s politics ever since its independence over 60 years ago. Incumbent President Samia Suluhu Hassan, Africa’s first female head of state, is widely expected to cruise to victory on October 29th.

In January 2025 CCM confirmed Hassan as its presidential candidate. In practice, the race is uncompetitive: Hassan’s two main competitors have been barred from standing. Tundu Lissu, charismatic opposition leader and 2015/2020 candidate of the opposition Chadema party, as well as Luhaga Mpina of ACT-Wazalendo, were both disqualified. With Hassan all but certain to win, 16 minor-party candidates who barely campaigned will fill the remainder of the ballot.

Vice-President under the late John Magufuli, Hassan reversed some of his hardline measures early on, by reopening political space and rejoining international vaccine efforts. She focused on completing mega infrastructure projects (such as roads, railways, and power) and has generally been credited with steady economic growth. Even with this, what remains undeniable is that her administration has returned Tanzania to an authoritarian style of government later in her term.

The Election Campaign Environment & Democratic Integrity

The campaign season took place under very tight restrictions and accusations of bias, with Chadema and ACT-Wazalendo effectively excluded, CCM ran largely unopposed nationally. State authorities reportedly attacked critics and journalists, by giving pro-CCM coverage nearly 24/7 while enforcing regulations to silence dissent.

For example, internet and social media were also tightly controlled: in the week before the vote Tanzania effectively banned “X” (formerly Twitter) for ordinary users, and on election day a nationwide internet blackout was reported.

For many Tanzanians and international observervers the process couldn’t be seen as anything but undemocratic. State security forces were omnipresent at rallies and polling stations; any public protests were swiftly banned. When small crowds gathered outside campaign events they were dispersed with force, and police warned that posting “inciting” political content online could lead to arrest.

Key Challenges and Threats

The election day triggered unrest in several major cities. Hundreds of young protesters took to the streets sometimes clashing violently with police. In Dar es Salaam and Mwanza demonstrators set buses and police posts on fire and security forces responded with tear gas and gunfire. Human-rights monitors reported that at least five civilians were killed (with some reports saying up to ten).

With dozens of unexplained disappearances of opposition figures and journalists in recent years, Hassan’s administration ordered an investigation into alleged abductions last year, but no official results were released. Prominent Chadema members remain on trial for “treason,” and several smaller opposition candidates were arrested in the final days just before the election. Combining these practices with the low turnout in urban areas especially among youth, suggests further loss of faith in the Tanzanian political system. All together, these threats mean that even a smooth tally would not resolve underlying tensions.

Regional & International Outlook

Regional bodies, such as observers from the African Union, the East African Community (EAC), and the Southern African Development Community (SADC) were present during the vote. The AU dispatched a 72-member mission led by former Botswana President Masisi and Nigeria’s ex-foreign minister Onyeama. In practice these delegations will issue preliminary statements after the vote and full reports in the coming weeks.

However, international reactions have been mixed. Most western observers have voiced sharp criticism: a statement by European Parliament members called Tanzania’s election “neither free nor fair,” and urged its global partners to defend democracy. While the U.S. and EU members’ embassies had previously expressed concern about the campaign environment, neither imposed sanctions.

By contrast, major developing powers have maintained a low profile. China and Russia, both deeply engaged economically in Tanzanian infrastructure and mining projects, have largely stuck to their policy of non-interference.

Signing a $1.4 billion deal with China for railway work and a $1.2 billion uranium mining agreement with a Russian firm this year, neither Beijing nor Moscow publicly commented on the vote, focusing instead on stable relations and continued investment. African neighbors similarly avoided direct criticism; the emphasis has been on observing procedure rather than questioning the outcome.

Future Scenarios & Implications

In the short term, this will bring continuity of policy: infrastructure projects under construction can proceed, and Tanzania’s economy, is likely to keep growing moderately, especially by investment from China and Russia, which see Tanzania as a strategic hub.. By sidelining credible opposition, the government sacrifices long-term political accountability and invites heavier criticism from human-rights NGOs.

Meanwhile, some youth activists have threatened further protests, declaring that Tanzanians are shifting into active citizens. Should street violence or international pressure grow, the election’s aftermath will set the tone for Tanzania’s next chapter. A smoothly managed outcome could cement CCM rule for years, but if the polls are viewed as a coerced victory it may instead erode trust in government and fuel future crises. Tanzania’s 2025 election shows how fragile stability without competition is. Unless the political space reopens, the country risks trading short-term order for long-term disillusionment.

SANTIAGO, Chile, Oct. 31 (UPI) — President Gabriel Boric has submitted a constitutional reform proposal to the Chilean Congress that would make the armed forces permanently responsible for security in border areas, aiming to curb organized crime and irregular migration.

Border control is handled by Carabineros de Chile, the national police, and when the armed forces are needed for specific security operations, the government must request congressional authorization every 90 days.

The proposed reform, introduced earlier this month in the Senate for debate, would grant the armed forces power to conduct identity checks and searches. It would also allow soldiers to detain individuals caught committing crimes and hand them over to the Carabineros de Chile, or the Investigative Police.

According to the reform bill, the current situation is described as troubling.

“Along with the impact of irregular migration on the country, social cohesion and public policies, this phenomenon has been exploited by transnational criminal organizations to expand illicit markets such as smuggling, human trafficking and drug trafficking, among others, as well as to facilitate the illegal entry or exit of gang members through unauthorized crossings,” the document states.

Days before the bill’s introduction, Boric said he was confident Congress would move quickly to approve the reform “because that is what Chileans expect.”

The National Prosecutor’s Office, the agency that investigates crimes in Chile, on Monday released its 2025 Organized Crime Report, revealing that at least 16 transnational criminal organizations are operating in the country, including Venezuela’s Tren de Aragua, Colombia’s Los Shottas and the Trinitarios, active in the Dominican Republic and the United States.

Although drug trafficking remains the dominant criminal activity — accounting for nearly half of all income linked to organized crime in 2023 and 2024 — the report noted that crimes such as kidnapping and extortion showed the sharpest increases, while homicides dropped significantly.

The surge in irregular migration and organized crime has dominated Chile’s public and political agenda ahead of the elections. Presidential and congressional elections are set for Nov. 16, and the government is signaling its priorities through measures such as this proposed constitutional reform.

“One of the most prominent issues on the national agenda concerns crime and irregular migration, which people tend to see as connected,” political scientist Claudio Fuentes, director of the Institute for Social Science Research at Diego Portales University, told UPI.

He added that the reform proposal aims to show the government’s concern, “particularly that of the Chilean left, about border security, given the prominence the issue has gained and in the context of the presidential elections.”

Fuentes said the problem is that the government does not control either chamber of Congress, so the initiative will depend on opposition parties.

“It’s unlikely to be approved before the end of the administration [in March] because lawmakers are debating the 2026 budget in the middle of the parliamentary campaign. So this bill is more of a political gesture than a legislative measure likely to be discussed,” he said.

From Fuentes’ perspective, certain aspects must be addressed first.

Another bill pending in Congress would regulate the armed forces’ use of force in situations such as border control. Fuentes warned a risk exists that the military could operate under rules that might expose its members to legal consequences if they are accused of using excessive force in certain circumstances.

The image of a grieving parent is not an uncommon sight on the dramatic stage. Euripides, whom Aristotle called “the most tragic of the poets,” returns to the figure of the grief-stricken parent in “Hecuba,” “Hippolytus” and “The Bacchae,” to cite just a few disparate examples of characters brought to their knees by the death of their child.

Shakespeare offers what has become the defining portrait of this inconsolable experience in “King Lear.” Cradling the lifeless body of his murdered daughter, Lear can do nothing but repeat the word “never” five times, the repetition driving home the irrevocable nature of loss.

In tragedy, the protagonist is often plagued by guilt for his own role, however inadvertent or inescapable, in the catastrophe that befell his loved one. Theseus in “Hippolytus” and Agave in “The Bacchae” both have reason to feel that they have blood on their hands. Lear, though “more sinned against than sinning,” recognizes only after it’s too late the error in judgment that led to the devastation from which there can be no return.

The difference with “Guac,” the one-man performance work at the Kirk Douglas Theatre, is that Manuel Oliver isn’t just playing a bereaved father. He is one.

Manuel Oliver in “Guac.”

(Cameron Whitman)

Oliver’s 17-year-old son, Joaquín, known as Guac to family and friends, was one of the 17 lives lost in 2018 at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. The production, written and performed by Oliver, turns a parent’s grief into a theatrical work of activism.

Co-written by James Clements and directed by Michael Cotey, “Guac” has been sharing the story of Joaquín’s short but vividly lived life with audiences around the country. Oliver didn’t just love his son. He liked him. Guac was his best friend. He was also his trusted guide to American culture.

Immigrants from Venezuela, the family had made a new start in a country that Guac helped them feel was their home. To convey the meaning of Guac’s life, Oliver introduces his family members through a series of photo images he has crafted into artworks.

The last picture, and the one that remains staring at us throughout the performance, is of Guac. Oliver continues to enhance the portrait. While adding flourishes to the background and making adjustments to what his son is wearing, he tells us about the life they shared before it was tragically stolen.

Manuel Oliver works on a portrait of his late son in “Guac.”

(Donna F. Aceto)

The tragedy is overwhelmingly real. Oliver bears the weight of it by transforming his grief into fuel for activism. The performance makes the case for stricter gun law in America with the heartbreaking eloquence of a father whose life changed permanently after dropping his son off at school on a Valentine’s Day that started so promisingly.

What happened to Joaquín could happen to any of us, anytime, anywhere, in a country that has allowed its elected officials to deflect responsibility for their repeated failure to pass common sense gun legislation. While taking money from the NRA, these cynical politicians offer empty “thoughts and prayers” in place of meaningful reform. The result is that no one can go anywhere in public without eyeing the emergency exits and scanning the crowd for trouble.

Oliver isn’t a polished theatrical professional. He’s a dad, first and foremost. But it’s his comfortable ordinariness that allows him to make such a powerful connection with the audience. He’s onstage but could very well be exchanging a few neighborly words with us on our street.

Oliver summons his son by joyfully remembering his virtuosity on air guitar. Lynyrd Skynyrd’s “Free Bird” resounds throughout the Douglas while he enlivens the portrait with impassioned strokes. The words “I wish I was here” are added to Guac’s T-shirt, and it’s a sentiment we all devoutly, agonizingly share as Oliver brings his wife, Patricia, onto a stage that has urgently become an extension of our national reality.

In honor of Joaquín, the couple formed Change the Ref, an organization dedicated to raising awareness about mass shootings and empowering the next generation of activists through “creativity, activism, disruption and education.” “Guac” is a potent example of what can be done in the wake of a tragedy that can no longer be described as unthinkable.

Oct. 19 (UPI) — Former Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., a convicted fraudster and identity thief, has said he will work to reform U.S. prisons, having been released from a penitentiary Friday by President Donald Trump.

Trump commuted Santos’s seven-year sentence for wire fraud and identity theft, the latest in a series of moves by Trump to exonerate associates and Republicans involved in criminal activity.

Santos was expelled from the U.S. House in 2023 after refusing to resign following a scathing ethics investigation uncovered his criminal activity. In an interview with the Washington Post, Santos called his time in federal prison “dehumanizing” and “humbling.”

The former representative admitted to stealing the identities of 11 people, including his own family members. He served 84 days in prison before being exonerated by Trump and released from prison Friday night. He also admitted that he embellished and fabricated his biography during his run for Congress in 2020.

Santos called the prison system, and the facility where he was housed, FCI Fairton in N.J., as “broken” with “rotting facilities, and administrators who seem incapable or unwilling to correct it.” He said a large hole in the ceiling exposed “thick, black mold,” and claimed broken air-conditioning systems forced inmates to endure sweltering heat.

“The building itself is hardly fit for long-term habitation: sheet metal walls, shoddy construction, the look and feel of a temporary warehouse rather than a permanent facility,” Santos wrote on The South Shore Press website while he was incarcerated.

As part of his plea deal, Santos agreed to pay $600,000 in restitution and forfeiture costs.

Santos pushed back on critics who claim the former congressman is not being held accountable for his crimes, and said that, beyond repentance, he has “dealt a second chance.”

“I understand people want to make this into “he’s getting away with it. I’m not getting away with it,” Santos said following his release. “I was the first person ever to go to federal prison for a civil violation … I don’t want to focus on trying to rehash the past and want to take the experience and do good and move on with the future.

In announcing Santo’s commutation on social media, Trump claimed that the former congressman had been “horribly mistreated,” and that “at least” the former representative had the “Courage, Conviction, and intelligence to ALWAYS VOTE REPUBLICAN!”

Santos, 37, served fewer than three months of his seven year sentence. He said he has no plans to re-enter politics and would do his best to repay campaign donors based on “whatever the law requires of me.”

Zack Polanski, the Green Party Leader, had called Zia Yusuf, of Reform UK, “a fascist” on Question Time on the BBC last week, and he was asked about this on The Jeremy Vine Show

Green Party leader Zack Polanski made a thinly veiled goad at Reform UK’s Zia Yusuf.

The 42-year-old politician, who became leader of the party last month, said he feels the Greens’ popularity has surged recently because, in part, of his honesty and desire to challenge issues. He had clashed with Mr Yusuf, who is Nigel Farage’s top aide, during last week’s Question Time, during which Mr Polanski called the politician “a fascist”.

And Mr Polanski, from Salford, Greater Manchester, was interrogated about this on by Jeremy Vine on his Channel 5 show this week. The Green Party leader said: “The reason why we are surging in the polls and the reason why we are getting so many members is because if something walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I’ll call it a duck, and actually Nigel Farage, when he worked in the European Parliament, used to join forces with the Swedish Democrats.”

He later used the term “far right” in his response to Mr Vine, which led to a furious reaction from fellow panelist Carole Malone on Wednesday. The journalist and columnist said: “How dare you throw words like ‘Nazi’ around? Do you even know what that means? You are just going to let Reform get more votes by talking like that.”

READ MORE: Sarah Ferguson’s aide speaks out on ‘menacing’ Jeffrey Epstein threat to ‘destroy’ familyREAD MORE: Gasps as BBC Question Time guest challenges Reform UK’s Zia Yusuf on immigration

But Mr Polanski hit back at Ms Malone, describing her response as “faux outrage” and bringing the discussion onto immigration. He made the point he feels there are no “safe and legal routes” for anyone to reach the UK.

The topic came up on The Jeremy Vine Show after Mr Polanski was praised for his work on Question Time last week. He sat alongside the likes of Mr Yusuf, Tory MP Nigel Huddleston and journalist Annabel Denham in Shrewsbury, Shropshire.

Audience members applauded Mr Polanski when he accused the Reform politician of “spreading misinformation and fear” during a discussion, sparked by a guest challenging Mr Yusuf not to use the word “immigration” for the whole of the programme.

But Mr Yusuf swiftly declined the challenge, and instead insisted immigration is “the number one issue” in the UK at the moment. The 39-year-old businessman argued there has been “far too much mass immigration in this country” for some time.

Yet, Mr Polanski remained defiant – and continued his approach on The Jeremy Vine Show this week. Mr Vine, who has presented the programme since 2018, said Mr Polanski was “very tough” on Question Time, a stance for which the Green Party politician expressed no regrets. Later on the Channel 5 show, Mr Polanski stressed it is this approach which has led to the continued rise in the polls of the Green Party.

Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu faces two no-confidence motions this week as France’s political crisis deepens.

France’s embattled prime minister says he backs suspending a pension reform until after the 2027 presidential election in a bid to end the political turmoil that has gripped the country for months.

Prime Minister Sebastien Lecornu, 39, announced on Tuesday that he supports pausing an unpopular reform that raised the age of retirement from 62 to 64 in the hopes of securing enough votes to survive two no-confidence votes.

“I will propose to parliament this autumn that we suspend the 2023 pension reform until the presidential election. There will be no increase in the retirement age from now until January 2028,” he promised lawmakers during his policy speech, responding to a key request from the Socialists, a swing group in parliament crucial to his cabinet’s survival.

President Emmanuel Macron signed into law the bill to raise the retirement age, a signature economic reform that became the biggest domestic challenge of Macron’s second mandate as he faced widespread popular opposition to the changes and also sliding personal popularity.

Hundreds of thousands protested against the change in 2023 in towns and cities across the country.

Lecornu has faced an uphill battle since being appointed prime minister in early September. At the time of his appointment, he was the fifth prime minister in less than two years and faced deep political divides and a high debt load.

He ultimately stepped down from the post in early October, further deepening the country’s long-running political crisis. Macron then reappointed Lecornu as prime minister last week.

Lecornu faces two no-confidence motions by the hard-left France Unbowed and far-right National Rally parties. The two parties do not hold enough seats to topple Lecornu’s government on their own, but the prime minister could be ousted if the Socialist Party were to join forces with them.

The leader of the Socialists in the National Assembly said the decision to suspend the pension reform was a victory for the left.

Boris Vallaud did not explicitly say if his party would vote against the two motions of no confidence this week, but he said he believed in parliamentary debate and he would be ensuring the prime minister’s pledges be turned into actions.

Cyrielle Chatelain confirmed on Tuesday that France’s Greens party will support a no-confidence motion.

Earlier on Tuesday, Macron had warned that any vote to topple Lecornu’s cabinet would force him to dissolve parliament and call elections.

France, the eurozone’s second largest economy, is facing deep economic turmoil as Lecornu fights to keep his cabinet alive long enough to pass an austerity budget by the end of the year. During a speech on Thursday, he warned suspending the pension reform would cost about 400 million euros ($464m) in 2026 and 1.8 billion euros ($2.1bn) the year after and it should be offset by savings.

France’s ratio of debt to its gross domestic product is the European Union’s third highest after Greece and Italy and is close to twice the 60-percent limit fixed by EU rules.

France has been rocked by protests in recent months. In September, the Block Everything campaign spurred a nationwide wave of antigovernment protests that filled streets with burning barricades and tear gas as demonstrators rallied against budget cuts and political instability.

In October, about 195,000 people, including 24,000 in Paris, turned out for another day of nationwide strikes at the urging of French trade unions. The protests were triggered by widespread opposition to an austerity budget that the government has been trying to push through parliament.

THE Co-op has warned that up to 60,000 small shops across the UK could face closure without upcoming business rates reform for small shops.

In the 2024 Autumn Budget, Chancellor Rachel Reeves promised to provide permanent business rates relief for small retail properties.

1

At the time, the Government proposed raising business rates on the biggest retail properties with values over £500,000.

This would allow for a discount on rates for small retail and hospitality premises to be permanent.

The government has not yet set the rates, but changes are due to take effect in April 2026.

But the Co-op is now urging the Government to commit to the maximum levels of relief for smaller stores in the upcoming Autumn Budget on November 24.

Research conducted by the supermarket found one in eight small high street business owners will be at risk of shutting down if reforms are not delivered.

A further 10% of small said they would need to lay off staff.

Shirine Khoury-Haq, Co-op group chief executive, said: “The proposed system would improve the financial situation of 99% of retailers.

“How much they are protected from tax rises depends on decisions made in this Budget. To boost local economies, create jobs and provide community cohesion, we need inclusive growth.”

“That means supporting the businesses on the corners, in the precincts, on the parades and the high streets of every community.

” In order for them to not only survive, but to thrive, the government has to commit to the maximum levels of relief.” 

It comes as many larger retailers have voiced concerns over plans to increase business rates on larger stores, arguing the move could make them unprofitable or lead to price hikes.

In August, a letter signed by Morrisons, Aldi and JD Sports, warned that further tax rises on businesses could result in the Labour government breaking its manifesto pledge to provide “high living standards”.

It reads: “As retailers, we have done everything we can to shield our customers from the worst inflationary pressures but as they persist, it is becoming more and more challenging for us to absorb the cost pressures we face.”

Analysis carried out by the British Retail Consortium also suggested that 400 larger-format stores, such as department stores and supermarkets could close if the changes took place.

Many businesses have already seen their labour costs rise thanks to the rate of employer national insurance being increased in last year’s Budget.

The Treasury expects the new rates system will only impact the top 1% of properties.

A Treasury spokesperson said: “We are creating a fairer business rates system to protect the high street, support investment, and level the playing field by introducing permanently lower tax rates for retail, hospitality, and leisure properties from April that will be sustainably funded by a new, higher rate on less than 1% of the most valuable business properties.

“Unlike the current relief for these properties, there will be no cash cap on the new lower tax rates, and we have set out our long-term plans to address ‘cliff edges’ in the system to support small businesses to expand.”

TORIES will promise to introduce a US-style immigration force to deport up to 150,000 people a year.

Leader Kemi Badenoch will unveil the Conservatives’ toughest border policies yet at her first party conference.

3

3

The plan is part of a policy blitz as the Tories try to stop haemorrhaging support to Reform UK.

Ms Badenoch will pledge to create a £1.6billion removals force like the hardline US Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency.

Since President Donald Trump’s second term started in January, it has seen more than two million illegal immigrants either leave the US voluntarily or be removed.

As the party faithful gathered in Manchester, Ms Badenoch — who turned up hand-in-hand with husband Hamish — said: “We must tackle the scourge of illegal immigration to Britain and secure our borders.

“That is why the Conservatives are setting out a serious and comprehensive new plan to end this crisis.

“Labour offer failed gimmicks like ‘one thousand in, one out’.

“Reform have nothing but announcements that fall apart on arrival.”

The plan — if the Conservatives win the next election — would see all new illegal migrants deported within a week of arrival.

The “Removals Force” would be handed sweeping powers like facial recognition to spot them.

Police will have to conduct immigration checks on everyone they stop.

Illegal migrants would be banned from claiming asylum and refugee status will be for only those whose government is trying to kill them.

Immigration tribunals would be abolished and legal aid denied.

Ms Badenoch has committed to taking the UK out of the European Convention on Human Rights — used to argue against deportations.

But she has been accused of mimicking Nigel Farage’s Reform policies with tougher stances on borders and net zero.

Insiders claim Tory MPs are holding on to letters calling for Ms Badenoch to quit so they can use them when she can be challenged after a year in office — on November 3.

But others expect a move would be more likely after May’s local elections.

Asked if they will topple Ms Badenoch after another bad performance at the ballot box, Shadow Energy Secretary Claire Coutinho told The Sun on Sunday: “Kemi’s had one of the toughest jobs in politics.

“If you’re someone who takes over a party after it’s lost an election, it’s a pretty rough ride.

“We’re now taking on energy and you’ll see even more from us on immigration.

“Those are the things that I think the public care about.”

But on the eve of the Conference, London Assembly member Keith Prince became the latest Tory to jump ship to Reform.

A Labour Party spokesperson insisted: “The Conservatives’ message on immigration is; we got everything wrong, we won’t apologise, now trust us.

“It won’t wash.”

3

The Home Secretary has vowed to do whatever it takes to secure the UK’s borders as she unveils a Farage-style crackdown on migrants.

The government will slap tough new conditions on migrants requiring them to prove they are valuable to society or face the boot, Shabana Mahmood MP said during a speech at Labour conference on Monday.

4

4

The plans are Labour’s latest attempt to wrestle ownership of the immigration issue off Reform, which has led the debate and gained huge popularity.

In order to earn indefinite leave to remain (ILR), migrants will have to learn to speak a “high standard” of English, Mahmood said on Monday.

Most migrants can currently apply for ILR after five years of living in Britain – handing them the right to live here forever.

But that may soon double to ten years and be limited to those who pay National Insurance, Mahmood revealed in her first Labour Party conference speech.

Migrants will also be required to have a clean criminal record, not claimed benefits and prove a record of volunteering in local communities.

The Home Secretary promised to “do whatever it takes to secure our borders”.

She said: “Time spent in this country alone is not enough. You must earn the right to live in this country.”

Meanwhile, Mahmood slammed Mr Farage as “worse than racist… it’s immoral”.

Officials say the new “earn it” system will allow migrants to “earn down” the ten-year wait through positive contributions – or “earn up” if they fail to pull their weight.

But the crackdown does not apply retrospectively, meaning the so-called “Boriswave” of approximately 1.3million who arrived between 2021 and 2024 can still qualify for ILR after just five years.

It is understood Ms Mahmood is weighing a separate emergency fix just for them, though it may not be the same model.

One source close to the Home Secretary said: “For anybody who is in the country now, the new conditions don’t apply.

“But she is looking closely at what to do about the Boris wave, because she is concerned about what happens when that group passes beyond the five-year mark and automatically receives ILR.”

Lawyers have warned any retrospective move would spark fierce legal challenges.

4

4

Ashley Stothard, Immigration Lawyer at Freeths, said on applying the ten-year rule retrospectively: “I think that change would be challenged by judicial review on the basis that it’s unfair.

“We saw a similar situation back in 2008 when the Government attempted to retrospectively change the criteria for the Highly Skilled Migrant Programme.

“That challenge was successful, and the new criteria were not applied to those already in the UK.

“The case upheld the principle that immigration policy should be fair and transparent. Migrants in the UK have a legitimate expectation that they can qualify for Indefinite Leave to Remain under the rules in place when they entered.”

Ms Mahmood yesterday warned Labour members they might not like her migrant crackdown.

She said: “In solving this crisis, you may not always like what I do. We will have to question some of the assumptions and legal constraints that have lasted for a generation and more.

“But unless we have control of our borders and until we can decide who comes in and who must leave, we will never be the open, tolerant and generous country that I know we all believe in.”

Nigel Farage’s anti-immigration Reform UK, which is leading in opinion polls, said last week it was considering scrapping “indefinite leave to remain”, and replacing it with a five-year renewable work visa.

Starmer accused Reform on Sunday of planning a “racist policy” of mass deportations, although he clarified he did not think Reform supporters were racist.

The prime minister has warned Reform UK “will tear this country apart” ahead of the Labour party conference.

Arriving in Liverpool on Saturday, Sir Keir Starmer said Reform’s plans to abolish indefinite leave to remain (ILR) for legal migrants was one of “the most shocking things” Nigel Farage’s party had said.

Sir Keir said the conference would be an opportunity to show Labour’s alternative to the “toxic divide and decline” offered by Reform.

He is under pressure after opinion polls show Labour trailing Reform UK, alongside speculation Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham could mount a leadership challenge.

But in an interview with the Sunday Times, Sir Keir insisted Labour could still “pull this round”, and said it was time for Labour to put in the “hard yards, roll up our sleeves and get on with it”.

Farage told the Telegraph, Sir Keir’s language “smacks, frankly, of total desperation” after the prime minister referred to Reform as an “enemy” in an interview with the Guardian.

“To call somebody in politics an enemy is language that is bordering on the inciteful,” he added.

Arriving at the conference centre in Liverpool, Sir Keir said it would be a “big opportunity to make our case to the country, and make it absolutely clear that patriotic national renewal is the way forwards – not the toxic divide and decline that we get with Reform”.

He continued the attacks as the conference got under way, telling the Sunday Mirror Farage was “grubby“, and that the Reform leader was “unpatriotic” for pretending he would fix problems that mattered to voters.

“Add to that that he spends more time grubbing around in America, trying to make money for himself than he does representing his constituents,” he said.

“He goes there not just to make money, but to talk our country down. The leader of a political party going to another country to talk his own country down. Grubby.”

Comparisons with Reform could be a theme of this conference, as Sir Keir tries to portray his party as a patriotic alternative to Reform, who continue to lead opinion polls.

Last week, Reform announced it will replace ILR with visas and force migrants to reapply every five years, if the party wins the next election. That includes hundreds of thousands of migrants currently in the UK.

Applicants would also have to meet certain criteria, including a higher salary threshold and standard of English. ILR is a key route to gaining British citizenship and allows people to claim benefits.

According to a YouGov poll published on Saturday, abolishing indefinite leave to remain divides the public, with 58% of Britons opposed to removing it from those who already hold it.

But more than 44% say they support ending ILR as a policy, while 43% are opposed to the idea.

During a visit to the office of newspaper Liverpool Echo, Sir Keir said: “These are people who have been in our country a long time, are contributing to our society, maybe working in, I don’t know, hospitals, schools, running businesses – our neighbours, and Reform says it wants to deport them in certain circumstances.

“I think it is a real sign of just how divisive they are and that their politics and their policies will tear this country apart.”

In an interview with the Sun on Sunday, Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said legal migration was a “good thing” and the UK had “always welcomed people who want to come and work here”.

However, she said migrants should make a “contribution to their wider community”.

“So I am looking at how to make sure that settlement in our country – long term settlement, Indefinite Leave to Remain – is linked not just to the job you are doing, the salary you get, the taxes you pay, [but] also the wider contribution you are making to our communities,” she added.

Speaking to teenagers at the Liverpool Echo visit, Sir Keir also insisted the government would not legalise cannabis, and defended his plans to lower the voting age to 16 in general elections.

“It already happens in Scotland, already happens in Wales, and the sky didn’t fall in,” he said.

Ahead of the Labour conference, backbench MPs and unions renewed calls to end the two-child benefit cap.

Several MPs from Liverpool were among those who wrote to Sir Keir ahead of the conference insisting the cap “is one of the most significant drivers of child poverty in Britain today”.

Two MPs – former shadow chancellor John McDonnell and Apsana Begum – have had the whip restored, after a year-long ban for voting against the government on the cap.

McDonnell told the BBC: “If this is a signal the government is going to scrap the two-child limit I’m really pleased.”

The prime minister’s plans for a new digital ID system, revealed on Friday, will also likely face scrutiny at the conference.

Senior Labour figures are meanwhile expected to set out the details of a fresh tranche of “New Towns” at the event.

PA Media

LinkedIn

Legal barriers

The County Championship is to remain a two-division structure of 14 matches per team after a vote rejected proposed changes.

Eighteen first-class counties were asked to choose between the status quo and a new system of a 12-team top flight, six in the bottom tier, with each team playing 13 matches.

The ballot returned a result on Tuesday, one day before the final round of this season’s County Championship matches begin.

A majority of 12 counties were required to vote for change in order to push through the reform, a figure that was not met.

The result of the vote means the County Championship retains its current structure of 10 teams in Division One and eight in Division Two, with two teams promoted and relegated between each.

It brings to an end a lengthy examination of the domestic schedule, conducted by the counties.

A revamp of the Twenty20 Blast, cutting the number of group games from 14 to 12 and bringing finals day earlier in the season, was agreed in August.

However, differing opinions among the counties about the way forward for the Championship have resulted in retaining the current set-up.

A number of proposals were put forward, including reducing the number of first-class matches to 12, a number favoured by the Professional Cricketers’ Association (PCA).

When it became clear the shift from 14 to 12 was dead in the water, the 12-team top flight with a 13-match structure was proposed.

The idea involved the 12 teams being split into two groups of six, playing each other twice for an initial 10 games. At that point, the two groups would be split in half to create two further groups of six that would play for the Championship and relegation places.

When I wrote last week about how immigration raids are targeting far more laborers than criminals, and whacking the California economy at a cost to all of us, I was surprised by the number of readers who wrote to say it’s high time for immigration reform.

The cynic in me had an immediate response, which essentially was, yeah, sure.

Bipartisan attempts failed in 2006 and 2014, so there’s a fat chance of getting anywhere in this political climate.

But the more I thought about it, nobody has done more to make clear how badly we need to rewrite federal immigration law than guess who.

President Trump.

Raids, the threat of more raids, and the promise to deport 3,000 people a day, are sabotaging Trump’s economic agenda and eroding his support among Latinos. Restaurants have suffered, construction has slowed and fruit has rotted on vines as the promised crackdown on violent offenders — which would have had much more public support — instead turned into a heartless, destructive and costly eradication.

I wouldn’t bet a nickel on Trump or his congressional lackeys to publicly admit to any of that. But there have been signs that the emperor is beginning to soften hard-line positions on deportations of working immigrants and student visas, sending his MAGA posse into convulsions.

“His heart isn’t in the nativist purge the way the rest of his administration’s heart is into it,” the Cato Institute’s director of immigration studies, David J. Bier, told the New York Times. Despite the tough talk, Bier said, Trump has “always had a soft spot for the economic needs from a business perspective.”

So too, apparently, do some California GOP legislators.

In June, six Republican lawmakers led by state Sen. Suzette Martinez Valladares (R-Santa Clarita) sent Trump a letter urging him to ease up on the raids and get to work on immigration reform.

“Focus deportations on criminals,” Martinez Valladares wrote, “and support legal immigration and visa policies that will build a strong economy, secure our borders and protect our communities.”

Then in July, a bipartisan group of California lawmakers led by State Sen. Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh (R-Yucaipa), followed suit.

Ochoa Bogh urged “immediate federal action … to issue expedited work permits to the millions of undocumented immigrants who are considered essential workers, such as farmworkers who provide critical services. These workers support many industries that keep our country afloat and, regardless of immigration status, we must not overlook the value of their economic, academic, and cultural contributions to the United States.”

State Sen. Suzette Martinez Valladares (R-Santa Clarita) sent President Trump a letter urging him to ease up on raids and focus on immigration reform.

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

Ochoa Bogh told me she heard from constituents in agriculture and hospitality who complained about the impact of raids. She said her aunt, a citizen, “is afraid to go out and carries a passport with her now because she’s afraid they might stop her.”

The senator said she blames both Democrats and Republicans for the failure to deliver sensible immigration reform over the years, and she told me her own family experience guides her thinking on what could be a way forward.

Her grandfather was a Mexican guest worker in the Bracero Program of the 1940s, ‘50s and ‘60s, ended up being sponsored for legal status, and eventually moved his entire family north. Since then, children and grandchildren have gone to school, worked, prospered and contributed.

If Trump were to respond to her letter and visit her district, Ochoa Bogh said, “I would absolutely have him visit my family.”

Her relatives include restaurateurs, the owners of a tailoring business, a county employee and a priest.

“We don’t want undocumented people in our country. … But we need a work permit process” that serves the needs of employers and workers, Ochoa Bogh said.

Public opinion polls reflect similar attitudes. Views are mixed, largely along party lines, but a Pew study in June found 42% approval and 47% disapproval of Trump’s overall approach on immigration.

A July Gallup poll found increasing support for immigration in general, with 85% in favor of a pathway to citizenship for immigrants brought to the U.S. as minors, and 60% support among Republicans for legal status of all undocumented people if certain requirements are met.

State Sen. Rosilicie Ochoa Bogh, shown with Senate Republican Leader Scott Wilk in 2022, says constituents in agriculture and hospitality have complained about the impact of raids.

(Rich Pedroncelli / Associated Press)

So it’s not entirely surprising that a bipartisan congressional immigration reform bill, the Dignity Act of 2025, was introduced in July by a Florida Republican and a Texas Democrat. It would allow legal status for those who have lived in the U.S. for five years, are working and paying taxes, and have no criminal record.

Victor Narro, project director at the UCLA Labor Center, isn’t optimistic, given political realities. But he’s been advocating for immigration reform for decades and said “we need to continue the fight because there will be a time of reckoning” in which the U.S. will “have to rely on immigrant workers to assure economic survival.”

“Germany had to resort to guest worker programs when birth rates declined,” said Kevin Johnson, a former UC Davis law school dean. “We may be begging for workers from other nations in the not too distant future.”

“No side wants to give the other a victory, but there have got to be ways to close that gap,” said Hiroshi Motomura, a UCLA immigration scholar whose new book, “Borders and Belonging: Toward A Fair Immigration Policy,” examines the history and causes of immigration, as well as the complexities of arguments for and against.

“Practically and politically, there’s potential” for reform, Motomura said, and he sees a better chance for rational conversations at the local level than in the heat of national debate. “You’re more likely to hear stories of mixed families … and that kind of thing humanizes the situation instead of turning it into a lot of abstract statistics.”

Ochoa Bogh told me that when she wrote her letter to Trump, the feedback from constituents included both support and criticism. She said she met with her critics, who told her she should be focused on jobs for citizens rather than for undocumented immigrants.

She said she told them she is all for “American people doing American jobs.” But “we have a workforce shortage in the state in various industries,” and a U.S.-born population that is not stepping up to do certain kinds of work.

“I said to them, ‘You can’t keep your eyes closed and say this is what it should be, when there are certain realities we have to navigate.”

So what are the chances of progress on immigration reform?

Not great at the moment.

But as readers suggested, a better question is this:

Why not?

[email protected]

Conservative MP Danny Kruger has become the first sitting Conservative MP to defect to Reform UK.

Kruger has been an MP since 2019, and sat on Tory leader Kemi Badenoch’s team as a shadow work and pensions minister.

“The Conservatives are over,” he told a press conference, sitting alongside Reform party leader Nigel Farage.

Kruger said he had been “honoured” to be asked to help Reform prepare for government, and said he hoped that Farage would be the next prime minister.

The East Wiltshire MP – who has said he would not be triggering a by-election – said the Conservatives were no longer the main party of opposition.

He said: “There have been moments when I have been very proud to belong to the Tory party”, but added: “The rule of our time in office was failure.

“Bigger government, social decline, lower wages, higher taxes and less of what ordinary people actually wanted.”

He added: “This is my tragic conclusion, the Conservative Party is over, over as a national party, over as the principal opposition to the left.”

Although he said he had “great regard” for Badenoch, he said the Tory party had a “toxic brand”, adding: “We have had a year of stasis and drift and the sham unity that comes from not doing anything bold or difficult or controversial.”

Describing his move leaving a party he has been a member of for 20 years as “personally painful”, he said his “mission” with Reform would be to “not just to overthrow the current system, it is to restore the system we need”.

Responding to the news of the defection, Badenoch said: “Danny has made his case very clear, that this is not about me.

“I can’t be distracted by that, and I’m not going to get blown off course by these sort of incidents.

“I know this is the sort of thing that is going to happen while a party is changing. I’m making sure people understand what Conservative values are.”

Kruger’s defection is damaging for Badenoch, not only as a Tory thinker and veteran, but also as the most significant among several from the party moving to Reform.

Speaking after the press conference, Kruger told the BBC he had come to the conclusion the Conservative Party remains “the same party that failed the people in the last government” and doesn’t have “any chance” of winning the next election.

A few weeks ago, Kruger said he agreed with Reform on many issues except public spending, telling MPs in July: “There is a problem: they would spend money like drunken sailors.”

Asked about his comment, Kruger said: “I think we’re all sober sailors now, I’m glad to say, because since I said that Reform have corrected their position on welfare spending.

“I was very concerned that we need to really reduce overall benefit spending… Nigel made clear he also wants to bring down overall benefit spending but he does want to support families with children.”

Kruger is the second sitting MP to join Reform UK. Lee Anderson, who was previously a Tory MP, sat as an independent before joining Reform in 2024.

Reform now have five MPs in the Commons, having seen two of their MPs elected in the 2024 general election, Rupert Lowe and James McMurdock, leave the party.

His previous jobs include serving as former Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron’s speechwriter, penning the “hug a hoodie” speech, and as former political secretary to Boris Johnson when he was prime minister.

Kruger spoke in a 2022 Parliamentary debate about the US’s abortion ban and told MPs he disagreed that pregnant women had an “absolute right to bodily autonomy” and that he didn’t understand why the UK was “lecturing” the US.

In 2023, Kruger was one of the speakers at a National Conservatism Conference, an event organised by a right-wing think tank from the United States, and made comments about the role of conventional family values in society.

The evangelical Christian told delegates that marriages between men and women were “the only possible basis for a safe and successful society” and one that “wider society should recognise and reward”.

Rishi Sunak, the Conservative prime minister at the time, distanced himself from the remarks.

Kruger is the son of TV chef Prue Leith and an Old Etonian, who studied at Edinburgh and Oxford Universities before becoming a director at the Centre for Policy Studies.

A Labour Party spokesperson said: “Nigel Farage can recruit as many failed Tories as he likes – it won’t change the fact that he has no plan for Britain.

“Britain deserves better than Reform’s Tory tribute act that would leave working people paying a very high price.”

Liberal Democrat deputy leader Daisy Cooper labelled the Conservative Party “a shell of its former self” and said Badenoch had pushed lifelong Tories towards her party “in their droves”.

“Nigel Farage’s party is shapeshifting into the Conservatives in front of our very eyes,” she said.

“It is getting to the point where the only difference between them is just a slightly lighter shade of blue.”

SEOUL, Sept. 12 (UPI) — South Korean Foreign Minister Cho Hyun called on Washington on Friday to reform its visa policies to avoid a repeat of last week’s immigration raid and detention of South Korean workers at a Hyundai electric battery plant in Georgia.

Cho met U.S. Sens. Todd Young, Bill Hagerty and Andy Kim in Washington on Wednesday and Thursday to express the South Korean public’s “deep concern” over the arrests of its professionals, the ministry said in a statement.

Multiple agencies led by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrested 475 people, most of whom are South Korean nationals, at a Hyundai-LG Energy Solutions battery plant near Savannah, Ga., on Sep. 4.

After being held for a week, 316 South Koreans and 14 other employees were released and departed from Atlanta on a charter jet late Thursday morning local time.

The plane landed at Incheon International Airport near Seoul at around 3:23 p.m. on Friday, news agency Yonhap reported.

In his meeting with the senators, Cho “emphasized the urgent need for fundamental measures to prevent recurrence of such incidents and to protect our workforce from unfair treatment so that Korean companies can fulfill their investment commitments in the United States,” the ministry said.

He urged Congress to support visa reform, including the introduction of a new visa category for South Korean professionals on investment projects.

The senators “agreed that this incident should not negatively impact economic cooperation between South Korea and the United States,” according to the ministry.

“They welcomed the agreement between the two countries to explore long-term solutions, including the establishment of a South Korea-U.S. working group, to prevent similar incidents,” the ministry said. “They also pledged to explore necessary institutional support, including legislative action.”

On Thursday, South Korean President Lee Jae Myung called the immigration raid “perplexing” and said it could deter firms from making future investments in the United States. Lee touched on the subject during a press conference marking his 100th day in office, noting that South Korean firms regularly send skilled workers for short stays to help establish overseas factories.

The roundup came less than two weeks after Lee met with Trump in the White House, and has sparked widespread public shock and anger in South Korea. Seoul and Washington are looking to finalize a trade deal struck in July that includes a $350 billion investment pledge by South Korea.

Without visa reform, companies “will have to worry about whether establishing a local factory in the United States will be subject to all sorts of disadvantages or difficulties,” Lee said.

“Under the current circumstances, Korean companies will be very hesitant to make direct investments in the United States,” he said.

SIR Keir Starmer tried and failed to boot Ed Miliband from his Net Zero brief, it was claimed today.

The PM is understood to have asked the Energy Secretary to swap jobs and take over disgraced Angela Rayner’s housing department during Friday’s cabinet reshuffle.

1

But the former Labour leader dug in, insisting he wanted to keep control over the green agenda.

Sir Keir has vowed to put growth centre stage as he battles to steady Labour amid grim polling.

His reshaped top team points to a shift rightwards, as he braces for a looming challenge from Nigel Farage and Reform.

Mr Farage and his Deputy Richard Tice have made scrapping Net Zero a central pledge of the party.

Reform has vowed to repurpose billions in green funding to tackling illegal migration and restoring law and order.

No10 this morning insisted the PM is “delighted” Mr Miliband will stay on at the Department of Energy and Net Zero, but did not deny Sir Keir initially tried to move him.

The PM’s spokesman said: “The PM has set out his new Cabinet and ministerial team — a team that is going to be focused on delivery, with growth as a relentless focus.

“The Energy Secretary has been central to that growth agenda. Investing in clean energy goes hand in hand with cutting peoples’ bills and boosting growth across the country.

“You can see that with the investments being made into CCUS all across the country, into solar, into wind farms.

“The PM is delighted he’ll continue to do that.”

Labour sources admit the Net Zero push has been stalling activity, while firms quietly hope workers’ rights reforms could be softened or delayed.

New Work and Pensions Secretary Pat McFadden is preparing a fresh assault on the ballooning benefits bill, after Labour MPs scuppered the last attempt.

But Mr Miliband is seen as the head cheerleader for the “soft left” in Sir Keir’s cabinet.

His popularity with party members gives him the power make demands of the PM to ensure he cannot make trouble from the sidelines.