Badenoch Defends Jenrick Over ‘No White Faces in Birmingham’ Comments Amid Backlash

Published: 07 October 2025. The English Chronicle Desk.

Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative Party leader, has defended her colleague Robert Jenrick following widespread criticism over his remarks about not seeing “another white face” in a part of Birmingham, while emphasizing that discussions around integration should not focus on appearances. Speaking on BBC Breakfast, Badenoch described Jenrick’s comments as a “factual statement” and said there was “nothing wrong with making observations.” However, she stressed that the debate should focus on social cohesion and community integration rather than the racial or ethnic composition of a neighbourhood.

Jenrick’s comments, first reported by The Guardian, have sparked controversy across the political spectrum. At a dinner in March, the shadow justice secretary described his visit to Handsworth, Birmingham, as an eye-opening experience. According to his remarks, which have now resurfaced, he observed the area while filming a video on litter and said it was “absolutely appalling,” adding that it represented “one of the worst integrated places I have ever been to.” He claimed that during an hour and a half of filming, he did not see “another white face,” and expressed concern about the presence of what he described as “parallel communities.”

Jenrick went on to assert that his remarks were not about race or faith per se, but about the need for people of different backgrounds to live together rather than in segregated or disconnected communities. “I want to live in a country where people are properly integrated. It’s not about the colour of your skin or your faith, of course it isn’t. But I want people to be living alongside each other, not parallel lives. That’s not the right way we want to live as a country,” he said.

The remarks have drawn sharp responses from both political opponents and former Conservative figures. Andy Street, who served as West Midlands mayor until 2024, strongly rejected Jenrick’s characterization of Handsworth, describing the area as a highly integrated community. Speaking to BBC Newsnight, Street noted that Handsworth is home to a mixture of South Asian, Black, White, and other ethnic groups living side by side. “Putting it bluntly, Robert is wrong,” Street said. “Handsworth has come a hell of a long way in the 40 years since the last civil disturbances, and it is actually a very integrated place.”

Labour’s current West Midlands mayor, Richard Parker, went further in his criticism, accusing Jenrick of racism and questioning whether he was fit to serve as a Conservative MP. Parker described the comments as “appalling” and “disgusting” and urged that the voices of Handsworth residents be recognized. “Handsworth is a really vibrant community with lots of faiths and ethnicities working together and living together. The Soho Road is one of the most vibrant and successful high streets anywhere in the country,” Parker said in an interview with West Midlands radio. He emphasized the need for senior Conservative figures, including Badenoch, to assess whether Jenrick’s remarks were compatible with public office.

A spokesperson for Jenrick initially declined to comment further on the controversy. However, the MP later defended his remarks, arguing that multiple government reports over the past two decades had highlighted the existence of parallel communities and the need for an open discussion about integration. “The situation is no better today. Unlike other politicians, I won’t shy away from this issue. We have to integrate communities if we are to be a united country,” Jenrick said. He reaffirmed that his concerns were centered on the social cohesion of communities rather than racial composition.

Jenrick also addressed criticisms directly on Sky News, highlighting his personal connection to the West Midlands. Having grown up in the area and attended university in Birmingham, he said he was well aware of Handsworth’s dynamics. “I don’t resile from those comments. I want to live in a country which is well integrated. I want people living side by side. I never want to see segregated or even ghettoised communities. We want people of all skin colours, of all religions living in harmonious, well-integrated communities,” he stated. Jenrick further contended that while many areas were successfully integrated, some parts of Handsworth did not yet reflect this ideal, which concerned him deeply.

Badenoch, pressed on the issue ahead of her keynote speech at the Conservative Party conference on Wednesday, reiterated that the focus should be on integration and social cohesion rather than appearances. She questioned the accuracy of the reporting and suggested that the context of Jenrick’s comments might have been misunderstood, despite the existence of a published recording. “I believe, knowing Rob and hearing him speak, is that he wants, as I do, a country that is well integrated. It shouldn’t matter what you look like—your skin colour should not matter. That’s the speech I gave on Sunday. We are a multiracial country,” she told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

Badenoch emphasized that in a multicultural society, shared values and social cohesion are essential. “Being a multicultural country where people have different loyalties and values can fragment us. We need a socially cohesive country. That’s something the Conservatives are fighting for,” she said. When asked whether the number or appearance of people in a neighbourhood is a reliable measure of integration, Badenoch clarified that character and behaviour, rather than ethnicity, should define social cohesion. “The right measure for integration is that people don’t care what people look like. He was making a point which I don’t have the context of … we are a multiracial country and that means we have to work harder to bring people together. We look at the content of people’s character, not the colour of their skin. But how do we do that if we are too scared to point out where things are going wrong?”

The controversy has also drawn responses from local representatives. Ayoub Khan, the independent MP for Birmingham Perry Barr, which covers Handsworth, accused Jenrick of misrepresenting the community. Khan described the remarks as “awkwardly distorting the product of an all-out bin strike to fit his culture-warrior narrative filled with far-right cliches,” underscoring that the comments risked alienating a diverse and historically cohesive community.

This incident highlights ongoing tensions within the Conservative Party over issues of community integration, multiculturalism, and political messaging. It reflects the challenge of discussing sensitive topics such as parallel communities without triggering accusations of racism or cultural insensitivity. Observers note that while the party has long promoted integration as a core principle, remarks such as Jenrick’s risk diverting attention from policy solutions to public controversy.

Political analysts have suggested that the debate over Jenrick’s comments may have wider implications for the Conservative Party ahead of the general election. The party faces pressure to balance its messaging on social cohesion with the need to appeal to diverse constituencies in urban areas. Missteps on these issues could influence voter perceptions, particularly in cities like Birmingham, where the electorate is highly diverse and historically politically engaged.

Beyond the political ramifications, the controversy also underscores the importance of how public officials communicate complex social issues. While the government emphasizes integration and cohesion, public statements must be carefully framed to avoid misinterpretation. Jenrick’s remarks, whether intended as an observation or policy commentary, have sparked intense debate about language, context, and the responsibilities of elected officials.

In conclusion, Kemi Badenoch’s defence of Robert Jenrick underscores the ongoing challenge within British politics of addressing integration and cohesion in a multicultural society. While Badenoch stresses the importance of character and social values over appearance, critics argue that Jenrick’s comments risk misrepresenting diverse communities and inflaming tensions. The debate over Handsworth’s social dynamics, and the broader implications for national policy and party politics, is likely to continue, reflecting the complex interplay between observation, interpretation, and public accountability in modern Britain.