Tag: Danny Kruger MP

Shocking remarks by Danny Kruger MP


The Reform MP is asked about Israel and Gaza

November 2025

Danny Kruger is the MP for East Wiltshire (part of a county in England) and was voted in as a Conservative candidate in 2024. He switched just over a year later to become a Reform MP. He has a range of largely bizarre views and was interviewed by a Guardian journalist the results of which were published on 22nd of this month.

Our concern is not with his overall political views but on the specific remarks he made in answer to questions about Israel and Gaza which have implications for human rights. The journalist is Charlotte Edwardes. That section is as follows:

“[…] We move on to the conflict in Israel and Gaza, because he’s declared Palestine woke and I’d like to know how. He says the position of Israel is important to our politics in the UK, but also to the west in general, “because it stands for the idea of the nation and of western civilisation being something worth defending. [Israel] is fighting the battle for all of us in the Middle East”.

“Kruger does not believe Israel is committing genocide in the region: he says all the deaths in Gaza are the responsibility of Hamas. Nor does he feel Benjamin Netanyahu’s government has gone too far. “The children wouldn’t die if Hamas was not a security threat to Israel” he argues. “I can’t judge the precise tactics of particular IDF operations. I can well imagine there have been atrocities and excesses, as happens in wartime.” Is there no price too great in terms of human life for the elimination of Hamas? “Well, if that price is the elimination of Israel, then nothing is too great […].”

Normally, statements such as these would go unremarked being just one of many foolish statements made by a variety of MPs. But Kruger is advising Nigel Farage, the leader of Reform who, current polls predict are in a good position to form a government in the next election. He is thus someone who is influential and may be in a position to influence policy if Reform are successful in forming a government. A reading of the whole article – the result of three interviews – sees another journalist struggling to make sense of his remarks.

Comments
  • His comments are simplistic. To say ‘all the deaths in Gaza are the responsibility of Hamas’ is a gross distortion. It is accepted that Hamas is a terrorist organisation and the attack on October 7th was horrific. But Israel’s response has been wholly disproportionate making Gaza a wasteland and killing 70,000 Palestinians – many of them women and children.
  • He shows no sign of recognising the history of the conflict. It did not start on October 7th as so many of the Israeli cheerleaders want us to believe but its roots lie in the events following 1948/9 and the brutal expulsion and murder of at least 750,000 Arabs and Palestinians. He makes no reference to the system of apartheid operating in Israel making non-Jews second class citizens. As someone who has a DPhil degree from Oxford, it might be expected to see a greater understanding of historical causes of conflict.
  • It displays a degree of callousness to the suffering of the people of Gaza. To say ‘the children would not die if Hamas was not a security threat to Israel’ is crass not to say offhand. Elsewhere in the interview (and in other interviews and commentary) he makes great play of his Christian faith yet there is no sign of this in these comments.
  • Denial. He denies that Israel is committing genocide. He echoes the Labour government’s position on this which is no recommendation. How would you describe the deaths of 70,000, the deliberate destruction of all the hospitals, schools and water treatment plants, preventing food, water and medicines to enter the area? Perhaps there is another word Mr Kruger would like to deploy?
  • ‘Palestine [is] woke’ means what exactly? The interviewer does not get an answer.
  • The use of weasel words and phrases. ‘I cannot judge the precise tactics of IDF operations …’ is trite although he admits there have been atrocities and excesses. He has been quick to condemn Hamas (does he know the ‘precise tactics’ of their operations?) but tries to excuse IDF operations with these weasel words. The use of cluster munitions, using massive 500lb bombs to blow up entire buildings with no concern for who’s inside, parking remote control vehicles packed with explosives outside apartment blocks and blowing them up ditto.
  • His statement that Israel ‘stands for the idea of the nation and of western civilisation being something worth defending’ and that the country is ‘fighting the battle for all of us in the Middle East’. Can this really be true? How does apartheid fit into that? How does attacking olive farmers and destroying their trees count as civilised? Gangs attacking Palestinian villages at will with the police and army standing by – is this fighting the battle for all of us? The murder of many Palestinians in Israeli prisons. Holding over a thousand Palestinians in sometimes underground cells and the use of vile torture methods – are these values Mr Kruger wants us to support?
  • Finally, no mention or recognition of the violence on the West Bank.
  • His answer to the question ‘is there no price too great … ?’ is especially damning.

What emerges is someone who has a surface view of history and seemingly no understanding of the conflict or its roots. It is a combination of naivete and surface thinking. He seems to have swallowed Israeli ‘talking points’ wholesale. It lacks balance. Perhaps the most shocking part of the interview is the shear callousness concerning the death of children in vast numbers. We could add those who have lost limbs or have starved to death. This throwaway remark seems to be widely at odds with his purported Christian beliefs. He may be in an influential position in government after the next election when these beliefs will matter.

The full Guardian interview can be read here.

Recent posts:

1

Review of the year


Review of the year by Each Other

December 2024

A useful review of the year as far as human rights in the UK is concerned has just been produced by Each Other. They point to a number of human rights concerns in the UK. One issue were the calls for the country to leave the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR). A leading proponent of this was the East Wiltshire MP Danny Kruger. According to Politics he says the ‘Conservatives will not get back into power unless they make a commitment to leave the Convention’. The anger felt by Kruger and some of his colleagues concerns the issue of immigration and how we deal with people arriving here.

Immigration has indeed been one of the hot political topics during the year and was a key feature during the July election. There was a long drawn out proposal to send people to Rwanda and the first flight with the first of the deportees was due to leave from nearby Boscombe Down airfield. At the last moment, the European Court stepped in. It said more time should be allowed to consider the issue. It was this intervention which angered so many in the then government. Rwanda was abandoned by the Labour government.

Another important development during the year was the effects of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 which increased police powers to prevent or limit protests. We have the right to free speech and to assembly. Protests frequently anger governments of all stripes and it does not seem the Labour government is in any rush to repeal the act. The act has a deadening effect on protests – at least that was its intention. Protests have taken place with climate and the Palestine issue chief among them.

The Online Safety Bill is another contentious issue. It pits the right to free expression against guarding against hate speech. The murder of three little girls in Southport brought the issue to a head. Social media accounts alleged the alleged murderer was a Muslim and had arrived by boat. He is neither. It sparked widespread rioting and attacks on police and asylum hotels.

However, although most of the opprobrium was directed at social media, legacy media have maintained a prolonged campaign against immigrants, the boat people and Muslims. The Media Diversity Institute provides a number of examples and others are not difficult to find. They laid a groundwork for demonising ‘others’ and the response to the murders in Southport was arguably a result. Blame focused almost entirely on the rioters (correctly) and social media. The role of print media largely escaped censure.

Democracy and human rights are under threat in the UK. Elon Musk’s alleged major investment in a party in the UK will distort our politics if it happens. Musk is strongly against trade unions, for example. He has turned his X platform into a mouthpiece of far-right views. He regards the UK as a ‘tyrannical police state’. The point is not the expression of his views, which are shared by many, but that he has enormous wealth to put them into action.

Seasons greetings to our readers.

0

Hillsborough


Today, 15 April 2024, is the 35th anniversary of the tragedy

April 2024

Thirty five years ago today, 97 people died at the Leppings Lane end of Hillsborough stadium during an FA Cup semi-final between Liverpool and Nottingham Forest. Once the immediate shock of the death toll had passed, much of the media and South Yorkshire police put the blame on the supporters and in particular those from Liverpool for the tragedy. This blame became the standard narrative and was part of the judicial narrative as well. Plentiful lies were told and a headline in the Sun newspaper has meant the paper is no longer sold in Liverpool to this day.

The copious lies told by the police meant inquests were thoroughly unsatisfactory and the families of those who died spent decades in an attempt to get justice. Why it has appeared on this site is because justice was not achieved until the right to life provisions in the European Convention on Human Rights, now part of UK law, came into force. That, together with funding support, meant the police could be cross questioned and a jury returned a verdict of unlawful killing. Previous poor decisions by judges and a coroner were overturned. A report by the Hillsborough Independent Panel said:

“The disclosed documents show that multiple factors were responsible for the deaths of the
96 victims of the Hillsborough tragedy and that the fans were not the cause of the disaster.
The disclosed documents show that the bereaved families met a series of obstacles in their
search for justice“.

Today, in the light of the government’s desire to deport refugees to Rwanda – a final decision on which might be made in parliament this very week – will find that it is in direct conflict with ECHR. The Conservatives are divided on this and some, like local Devizes MP Danny Kruger, do not believe we need the court and object to Strasbourg effectively overriding our judicial system. He and others believe our system of justice based on the Common Law is sufficient protection. The prime minister Rishi Sunak in a recent statement believes that controlling immigration is more important than ‘membership of a foreign court’.

Common law, or indeed any law at all, did not save the Hillsborough families the decades of distress, dire judicial decisions, police lies and media denigration they have had to endure. The judicial system also failed to make anyone accountable for the wrongdoing and bad decisions which led to the disaster. It is interesting in researching this post and looking at the reports of the anniversary, how little or no mention is made of the ECHR in the the right-wing papers. Yet it was crucial in achieving justice for the families. Mr Kruger and others have a rosy view of our justice system despite what Conor Gearty refers to in a discussion of a succession of miscarriages of justice in his book On Fantasy Island*, ‘The role of judges in all this was either passive legitimisers of state abuse or – more scandalously – as drivers of wrong convictions in the first place’ (p40). He goes on to refer to how they seem somewhat impervious to ‘a succession of judicial debacles’ (ibid).

Hillsborough showed conclusively that we need the protections of the ECHR since our own legal system so often fails to offer protection to the ordinary citizen.

*Oxford University Press, 2016

0

Write for Rights


This Sunday, 10 December at the Cathedral

December 2023

Past event

Members of the Salisbury Group will be at the Cathedral cloisters from around 10 o’clock on Sunday for our annual Write for Rights and people in Salisbury are invited to come and sign. We must not forget that many people are in prison or at risk of execution often for no more than disagreeing with the powers that be in their country. They have committed no crime but have may said something disobliging or critical of a president, king or other leader and frequently without trial, can end up in prison for many years. Human Rights defenders, lawyers or journalists are all caught up in this activity.

United Kingdom

The situation in the UK is fast approaching a kind of crisis concerning the issue of deporting people to Rwanda. The government will be tabling a bill next week to disapply sections of the Human Rights Act to enable the deportation of immigrants to Rwanda. Previous plans were blocked by the Supreme Court because the human rights situation in Rwanda is unsatisfactory. Refugees sent there were at risk of refoulement that is being sent back to a country where they would be at risk of bad treatment of some kind. A plan last June to despatch a plane load from Boscombe Down, an airfield a mile or so from where this is being written, was halted by the European Court.

The issue of the ‘boat people’ has become a major issue for the government being one of the Prime Minister’s 5 objectives. Although only a small part of the overall level of immigration, it has assumed huge significance to the point where there might be a confidence vote next week if the bill is not passed. Ostensibly, it is partly due to anger around the gangs involved in organising the crossings. The hope is that if the Rwanda deportations can get underway, this will act as a disincentive to people wishing to cross the Channel. There are many who view this as wishful thinking.

Critics, including Conservative politicians, point out that the bill – even if it becomes law – will not prevent claimants appealing to Strasbourg thus delaying the deportation process until way beyond the likely date of the General Election. This is leading some politicians to demand that we leave the European Court as well.

A leading proponent of this is Danny Kruger the MP for Devizes in Wiltshire, who is co-founder of the ‘New Conservatives’ whose ten point plan is built around immigration matters.

The whole matter has reached almost absurd levels. The Supreme Court looked carefully at the evidence and concluded that Rwanda is not a safe country. Critics and journalists are frequently detained and tortured in detention. Opposition is effectively banned. There are disappearances. A new treaty has been signed between the UK and Rwanda a few days ago which claims to overcome these human rights problems identified by the Supreme Court and clear the way for deportations to take place.

It is almost an example of national hysteria combined with false promises coming home to roost. It was claimed that Brexit would enable the UK to regain its sovereignty a benefit of which was to stop boat crossings and reduce immigration generally. Yet recent figures show immigration at a record 745,000. The vast majority are here legitimately and are needed in a range of sectors such as health, horticulture and care homes. These organisations would find operating without them almost impossible. Yet hysteria has been ratcheted up by the media with its focus on the boat crossings. New proposals will prevent family members joining those already here which will cause great anguish in many, many cases.

We have now arrived at a situation where the government wished to disapply parts of the Human Rights Act and even contemplate departing from the European Convention to join Russia which was ejected in 2022. The statements around this matter by local MP Danny Kruger are to be regretted.

1

Plan to block HRA


Plan to disapply the Human Rights Act reported

November 2023

A report in the Guardian suggests the government proposes to disapply the HRA and block its use to enable the deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda. This follows the Supreme Court’s decision last week that Rwanda is not a safe country and individuals sent there would be at risk of refoulement. The government is under considerable pressure from the right of the party and in particular the ‘New’ Conservatives jointly led by Danny Kruger MP who is the member for Devizes in Wiltshire.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/19/rishi-sunak-could-block-key-human-rights-law-force-through-rwanda-asylum-plan

0

The ‘New’ Conservatives


Danny Kruger: the leader of the New Conservatives

July 2023

Danny Kruger, the MP for Devizes in Wiltshire, whose odd ideas on human rights we have had occasion to highlight before, is the founding member of the New Conservative grouping within the party. All their manifesto concerns considerable hardening of attitudes towards immigration. Their ten point plan is:

  1. Closing temporary schemes that grant work visa eligibility for care workers and senior care workers.
  2. Raising the minimum income required to gain a skilled work visa.
  3. Extending the closure of the student dependant route.
  4. Closing the graduate route to students.
  5. Reserving university Study Visas for the brightest international students.
  6. Monitoring the reduction in visa applications under the humanitarian schemes.
  7. Implementing the provisions of the Illegal Migration Bill rapidly.
  8. Capping the number of refugees legally accepted for resettlement in the UK.
  9. Raising the minimum combined income threshold for sponsoring a spouse and raising the minimum language requirement.
  10. Capping the amount of social housing that councils may assign to non-UK nationals. [Source Wikipedia]

Several of these policies run counter to the UK’s treaty obligations and would have significant impacts on human rights particularly concerning the Illegal Migration Bill currently struggling in the House of Lords. The care worker proposal for example, would make an already serious situation considerably worse. Their policies are all concerning immigration at present and are reported to be designed to appeal to Red Wall voters which, curiously, does not include Devizes, a safe Wiltshire seat. It is depressing that the people of Devizes should support Kruger and one assumes, these policies. The grouping claims to have 25 supporters but those listed do not add up to 25.

It is concerning that a group of MPs should see it advantageous to major on – to the exclusion of all else – a range of draconian anti-immigrant policies believing them to be popular with the electorate. Mr Kruger has previously claimed that a number of our country’s ills – long waiting lists for example – are the fault of immigrants.

The item concerning the cap on refugees would apply across the piece and would include those from Ukraine, Afghanistan and Hong Kong. Mr Kruger is a committed Christian and has spoken often about his beliefs. He is himself, the son of an immigrant and it is a curious fact that many in his party who are sons and daughters of immigrants (Priti Patel, Suella Braverman and Rishi Sunak) are so hostile to those who follow them.

Sources: Wiltshire Times, Premier Christian News, Wikipedia, Blavatnik School of Government (Oxford University), Politico

0

The curious thinking of Danny Kruger MP


Danny Kruger is the MP for Devizes in Wiltshire

April 2023

UPDATE: 6 July 2024

Kruger wins the newly created seat of East Wiltshire in the 2024 General Election. None of his odd thinking emerged during the election period.

Danny Kruger has become conspicuous in recent weeks as the quasi leader of a group of MPs who wish to see a firmer crackdown on the boat people crossing the Channel to claim asylum in the UK.  The issue of the boat crossings is the subject of considerable political controversy and many people are outraged at the arrivals.

He was in the news recently when it was reported that the government had ‘caved in’ to demands by party rebels, in which he was a leading member, to amend the Illegal Immigration Bill by allowing ministers to ignore European Judges in certain situations.  This sprang from the last minute intervention by the European Court which prevented the deportation flight to Rwanda last year from leaving Boscombe Down near Salisbury. This decision enraged many in the Conservative party and much of the right wing media.

He is in the news again this week for an article in the New Statesman (online) which repeats and amplifies comments about immigrants calling it a ‘national disgrace’.  He goes on:

“The importance of this topic to many voters cannot be overstated.  To put it as plainly as people outside the liberal bubble put it: the small boats scandal shows that the powers that be are not on the side of the British people, but instead serve the abstractions of “human rights”, “international law”, or other signals of the middle class virtue. Lawyers and activists get to buff their own haloes while ordinary people pay the price, in longer queues for public services, lower wages and higher taxes”. 

The placing of human rights and international law in inverted commas is interesting and is a piece with another quote from a chapter he wrote on this subject discussed below.  The article suggests that ordinary people are experiencing difficulties in obtaining public services and having to pay higher taxes because of this immigration.  The facts speak otherwise and a number of Home Office reports demonstrate that immigrants are a net benefit to the UK economy. Mr Kruger may be forgiven for not knowing this as the reports have not been published. Wording such as the ‘abstractions’ of human rights suggest that they are in some way theoretical and is perhaps intended to be dismissive. ‘Powers that be’ is also puzzling since that is the Conservative party of which he is a member. Issues of access to public services is as a result of government policy, austerity and other matters not connected with immigrants.  

In a book produced by a group of backbench Conservatives called Common Sense: Conservative Thinking For a Post-Liberal Age (2021) is a chapter written by Danny Kruger entitled Restoring rights: Reclaiming Liberty. This chapter goes a little way to explain the thinking of the MP.

His chapter contains odd reasoning and some curious logic.  His first claim is that the European Convention on Human Rights, drafted by British Lawyers after World War II [lawyers from other countries were involved so it is incorrect to say ‘British lawyers’] ‘sits uncomfortably with the English tradition of preventing tyranny’.  This will come as something of a surprise to the millions of people who were enslaved and were worked to death in the sugar plantations or those who worked in fearful conditions in nineteenth century factories.  The acquisition and retention of Empire also has many horror stories. Quite where this ‘prevention of tyranny’ was taking place is not made clear.

Human rights are misnamed he claims ‘the rights we really need, and the only ones we really have, derive from something higher and something lower than mankind.  They derive from the idea of God, and from the fact of nations: from a Christian conception of law …’ It would be difficult to locate in the Bible many of the principles enshrined in the ECHR or the Human Rights Act (which Mr Kruger is keen to abolish) if only because these ideas and principles were a long way from a society colonised by the Romans and where practices like slavery were common.  There are many favourable references to slavery in the Bible for example.  The ‘lower than mankind’ element is not explained (although it could be a reference to Psalm 8).

He quotes approvingly the American author Patrick Deneen who wrote Why Liberalism Failed (2018).  Many do not agree with Kruger’s admiration of Deneen’s book regarding his blame of a huge range of society’s ills on excessive liberalism to be odd not to say ridiculous.

His analysis seems to go seriously awry however with the following passage:

“And so, from an early stage we came to think of rights as the means by which we are set free from external pressure, set free from obligations to others; and from there it is a small step to the hypocritical assumption that rights confer obligations on others to satisfy us” p49 ibid.  This is a unique view of what human rights is about.  Surely the point of our system of government is that it does involve governments carrying out policies which are about the wellbeing of those who are governed?  It is why we elect members of parliament to raise taxes and pass laws which make our life as acceptable and as fair as possible.  Who are these ‘others’ he refers to?

To read all of Mr Kruger’s articles and speeches is to struggle to find a coherent strain of thought as far as human rights is concerned.  They are a mixture of false premises, muddled thinking and ideas sprayed around which frequently make little sense.  Yet he appears to be someone of influence in the party at present and is often to be seen being interviewed.

Sources include: New Statesman, the Sun, Evening Standard.

2

Curious insight into Conservative view of the Human Rights Act


Devizes MP Danny Kruger has written a chapter in a book by the Common Sense group

May 2021

In recent years some members of the Conservative party seem to have a problem with the Human Rights Act and some would like to see it abolished.  Far right newspapers typify the act as being a means by which terrorists, murderers and others escape justice because the act provides lawyers with a range of loopholes to get their clients off. They call it a ‘criminal’s charter’.  Many of the stories, on closer examination, turn out not to be true or wanton exaggerations. 

The current corpus of human rights law started life after the Second World War and there were a number of Conservative politicians who were active proponents, including Sir Winston Churchill and David Maxwell-Fyfe. 

Since 2015, the tone has changed and in the manifesto of that year, David Cameron promised to scrap the act.  Little happened and by the time of the 2019 manifesto, ‘scrap’ had gone and a review was promised.  What is to be reviewed and how a new act would look and what it would contain has never been clear.  At the time, the Salisbury group raised the matter with our MP Mr John Glen, but we were not much clearer what they wanted it replaced by. The review of the act is currently underway.

A new book has just been produced by a group of backbench Conservatives called Common Sense: Conservative Thinking For a Post-Liberal Age. In it, is a chapter written by the Devizes* MP Danny Kruger entitled Restoring rights: Reclaiming Liberty. 

His chapter contains odd reasoning and some curious logic.  His first claim is that the European Convention on Human Rights, drafted by British Lawyers after World War II [lawyers from other countries were involved so it is incorrect to say ‘British lawyers’] ‘sits uncomfortably with the English tradition of preventing tyranny’.  This will come as something of a surprise to the millions of people who were enslaved and were worked to death in the sugar plantations or those who worked in fearful conditions in nineteenth century factories.  The acquisition of Empire also has many horror stories. Quite where this ‘prevention of tyranny’ was taking place is not made clear.

Human rights are misnamed he claims. ‘The rights we really need, and the only ones we really have, derive from something higher and something lower than mankind.  They derive from the idea of God, and from the fact of nations: from a Christian conception of law …’  It would be difficult to locate in the Bible many of the principles enshrined in the ECHR or HRA if only because these ideas and principles were a long way from a society colonised by the Romans and where practices like slavery were common.  There are many favourable references to slavery in the Bible for example.  The ‘lower than mankind’ element is not explained.

He quotes approvingly of the American author Patrick Deneen who wrote Why Liberalism Failed (2018).  Many do not agree with Kruger’s admiration of Deneen’s book regarding his blame of a huge range of society’s ills on excessive liberalism to be odd not to say ridiculous.

His analysis seems to go seriously awry however with the following passage:

“And so, from an early stage we came to think of rights as the means by which we are set free from external pressure, set free from obligations to others; and from there it is a small step to the hypocritical assumption that rights confer obligations on others to satisfy us” (p49).

It is incorrect to say that requiring the state to act in a lawful and reasonable way towards its subjects is in anyway hypocritical.  What is hypocritical about requiring the State not to torture us? What is hypocritical about having a fair trial?  Nor is it true to argue that rights set us free from external pressure.  This seems to go to the heart of the objections raised by some Conservatives about the HRA, and the attempts to weave in duties.  The argument seems to be you only deserve these rights in limited circumstances and in a conditional way. 

This argument is further developed in this passage:

“This conception of rights must be rooted in the existence of a community – a real community, not the abstraction of ‘humankind’.  A real community entails reciprocal duties, situated in institutions that can enforce them and mediated by the conventions of people who know each other and share a common culture.  This is the nation.  We derive our rights from our citizenship (or more properly, our subjectship)”. p52 (our italics)

The problem all along with the objections to the HRA is trying to tie them down to specifics.  In an earlier Conservative document Protecting Human Rights in the UK, the examples seem to be stuck on deporting foreign criminals as an example of obligations. 

The Human Rights Act, brought in following cross party consensus – and falsely characterised as ‘Labour’s Human Rights Act’ – represented a significant shift in power.  Ever since the Norman conquest, power rested with the elites: the king, the barons and gradually the landowners and aristocracy.  Concessions were drawn from them as a result of unrest, riots or events such as the Peterloo massacre.  Magna Carta sought to restore some of the rights enjoyed during Saxon times.  The ‘Glorious Revolution’ brought further changes.  The Great Reform Act some more.

We were subjects not citizens.  The HRA changed that and gave citizens a range of fundamental rights (some of which are conditional).  It would appear that for a small number of Conservative backbenchers in the Common Sense group this is troubling.  Yet Mr Kruger’s chapter never gives solid reasons for change, only rather nebulous arguments which crumble away on close reading. 

*Devizes is a small town 25 miles north of Salisbury.

kruger chapter extractDownload
Common-SenseDownload
1

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑