Conservatives withdraw a briefing after backlash over remarks aimed at Suella Braverman’s mental health

The Conservative Party has been forced into an embarrassing retreat after issuing, and then retracting, a briefing that referred to the mental health of Suella Braverman on the day she defected to Reform UK. The episode has triggered cross-party condemnation and renewed accusations that Britain’s main opposition party has sunk into “gutter politics”.

Braverman, a former home secretary and long-standing Conservative figure, formally resigned her party membership of 30 years on Monday and crossed the floor to join Nigel Farage’s Reform UK. Her defection made her the party’s eighth MP, a symbolic blow to Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch as she struggles to stabilise her party following electoral defeats and internal unrest.

Shortly after Braverman’s announcement, Conservative headquarters circulated a statement to journalists attacking her record in government and questioning her motivations. The statement included a reference to her mental health, claiming the party had “done all we could to look after” her, while suggesting she had been “clearly very unhappy”.

The wording provoked immediate outrage. Reform UK accused the Conservatives of personal and inappropriate attacks, while senior politicians from across the political spectrum said the remarks crossed a clear line. Within around 90 minutes, a revised statement was circulated that removed all references to mental health. Conservative officials insisted the original version was an early draft that had been sent out “in error”.

Despite the retraction, the damage had already been done. Reform UK described the episode as emblematic of a party in decline. Speaking at a Westminster press conference, Nigel Farage said the Conservatives’ response to Braverman’s defection had been “pretty abusive” and insisted his party would not be drawn into similar personal attacks.

The backlash extended well beyond Reform. Labour MPs also condemned the briefing. Josh Fenton-Glynn described the comments as “horrible”, saying that attacking someone on mental health grounds was simply wrong. Government minister Mike Tapp added that the remarks were “below the standards we expect in public life”.

Braverman herself struck a defiant tone. Speaking later on Monday evening, she said the Conservative response said “more about them than it does about me”, presenting herself as the victim of a party lashing out under pressure.

The controversy comes amid a broader pattern of aggressive Conservative messaging against MPs who defect to Reform UK. When Robert Jenrick previously left the Conservatives to join Farage’s party, Badenoch publicly dismissed his departure as helpful “spring cleaning”, suggesting he had been undermining her leadership from within. Similarly, when former chancellor Nadhim Zahawi defected, Conservative officials briefed journalists that he had recently sought a peerage, an apparent attempt to undermine his credibility.

For critics, the Braverman episode represents a further escalation. While political attacks on defectors are nothing new, references to mental health are widely regarded as taboo, particularly at a time when parties routinely stress the importance of improving mental health awareness and reducing stigma.

The Conservatives’ insistence that the briefing was sent by mistake has done little to quiet criticism. Opponents argue that the language reflected internal thinking rather than an isolated error, and that the rapid amendment only followed public backlash.

Braverman’s defection itself remains politically significant. She will continue to sit as MP for Fareham and Waterlooville, strengthening Reform UK’s parliamentary presence and underlining the challenge Farage’s party poses to the right of British politics. For Badenoch, the episode adds to growing pressure over how her party handles internal dissent and public messaging.

As the row continues to reverberate through Westminster, it has reignited debate about standards in political discourse and the risks of personalised attacks. What was meant to be a sharp rebuttal to a high-profile defection has instead become a damaging distraction, leaving the Conservatives accused of losing both discipline and judgment at a critical moment.