In the week Keir Starmer faces a backlash for his immigration speech, local democracy reporter Robert Boddy says comparisons with Enoch Powell are unreasonable - and sets out how the controversy could actually benefit Reform…

In 1968, Enoch Powell made what is now commonly known as the ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech in response to the Race Relations Bill, arguing against it.

The bill sought to make it illegal to refuse someone housing, employment or public services based upon their race or colour of their skin.

Powell said it was not enough to halt immigration but it was also necessary to deport non-white people to prevent them from outnumbering the white population - an eventuality he called an “avoidable evil”.

He concluded by saying if nothing was done he had similar predictions as Virgil in the Aeneid, who said: “I see wars, horrible wars, and the Tiber foaming with much blood.”

The speech is not a pleasant one but I recommend, if you are drawn to compare Sir Keir Starmer’s latest immigration announcement to it, that you read it. The phrase which has attracted the most comparison is the “island of strangers” line of Starmer’s - your interpretation may vary - of all groups being disconnected from one another.

Powell’s speech, however, suggests the levels of immigration, and their offspring, which equally concerned him, would outnumber the white population of Britain and cause them to become “strangers in their own country”.

Regardless of your beliefs about immigration, I think it’s unreasonable to suggest Starmer’s speech is on the same level and, if you want to make the argument it’s at least heading in that direction, I’d still suggest we’ve a long way yet until that point.

Just because I don’t think Starmer’s speech is on the same level as Powell’s doesn’t mean I think it wasn’t a mistake for the Prime Minister - but I also think the Powell comparisons help Reform as well.

“Starmer could leave voters wondering why they would vote for an imitator of Reform when they could just go for the real thing…”

For some time, Starmer has been pursuing a “punch the hippy” strategy, banking on the idea that he can afford to move right on issues to look tougher because left-leaning voters don’t have a plausible party to jump to.

Starmer clearly wants to prove he isn’t the soft leftie Reform want to paint him as, but will he fall into the same trap as the Tories and leave voters wondering why they would vote for an imitator of Reform when they could just go for the real thing?

His best hope is that he pushes Reform to the extremes, positioning himself as tough but sensible on immigration while Farage is forced to go further, attracting the kind of fruitcake and loony criticism which tanked UKIP.

However I think Farage is incredibly conscious of public perception and will do his level best to avoid this - which I think, in part, explains the jettisoning of Rupert Lowe (read some of the Great Yarmouth MP’s tweets about mass deportations and the domination of a culture which “certainly isn’t British” and consider Powell comparisons).

But I think the comparison of Starmer’s speech to Enoch Powell actually benefits Reform for two reasons.

Firstly, although Starmer is trying to pose as tough on immigration, the negative reactions, particularly from his own MPs, will open Labour up to accusations that their hearts aren’t really in reducing immigration.

Farage and co have already been out saying, “Yes, this is a good announcement, but we don’t think they’ll follow through,” and you can bet they will leap on every MP who criticises the government.

But the accusations of being Powell-esque will feed the “they don’t want you to talk about this” rhetoric around immigration, which at minimum declares the government is out of touch, at most suggests a dark, treasonous conspiracy.

Regardless of your views on immigration, whether you see its merits or believe there are none, it is impossible to deny that successive governments have promised to reduce immigration, and it has increased.

The bare fact is that something was promised and not delivered - the exact thing which annoys voters the most.

I don’t think Starmer’s speech was like Powell’s, and I don’t think the comparison is beneficial to anyone but Reform, but the reality is - to a certain extent - what matters now is if the Prime Minister delivers what he has promised.

No amount of rhetoric can outweigh the power of actually doing something.

There are plenty of ways to stay in the know when it comes to politics in Kent and Medway.

For more from Simon Finlay and the local democracy team, you can sign up to the Kent Politics Briefing newsletter, which arrives in inboxes every Friday.

You can also listen to our Kent Politics Podcast. This week’s episode welcomes new KCC leader Linden Kemkaran, who moves to allay fears council staff might face a work-from-home ban.

You can listen to the podcast at IM Listening, or download it from Apple Podcasts, Spotify and TuneIn – just search for Kent Politics Podcast. New episodes are available every Friday.

And you can watch the KMTV Kent Politics Show every Friday at 5pm on Freeview channel 7 and Virgin Media channel 159.