Autumn 2007 found Gordon Brown close to triggering a surprise general election.

Labour had already produced its campaign literature, while around 100 helicopter slots at Battersea Heliport were reserved to fly Cabinet ministers into key marginal seats across the country.

Hundreds of party workers had also been instructed to prepare for deployment to Labour’s purpose-built election hub, with just 24 hours’ notice.

Yet the order was never given. With Brown seemingly heading towards an election that could have left them facing defeat, David Cameron and George Osborne mounted a last-ditch counteroffensive. In his Conservative conference address, Osborne promised that, if he became Chancellor, he would lift the Inheritance Tax threshold to £1 million. “Only millionaires will pay inheritance tax,” he declared.

The pledge struck an immediate chord with voters. Polling in the following days showed the Conservatives gaining substantial ground in marginal seats. Soon afterwards, Brown quietly abandoned plans for a snap poll, and the episode sent his personal approval ratings into a decline from which they did not recover.

Now, with another Conservative Party conference drawing near, Kemi Badenoch has a chance to deliver a similarly defining announcement—one that could reshape the political contest.

My colleague Gabriel Millard-Clothier revealed exclusively in The Mail on Sunday at the weekend that the Tory leader is considering the complete abolition of Inheritance Tax.

Publicly, Badenoch would say only: “I’ve asked my team to explore fiscally responsible ways to address this burden.” Privately, however, aides indicated that ending the tax is under serious consideration. “When she announced the abolition of stamp duty in last year’s speech, it was the moment her personal approval rating began to turn,” one ally said. “We think a big policy announcement like this could potentially have the same impact for the party as a whole. It’s a way of communicating, ‘OK, the traditional, solid, tax-cutting Tory party really is back.’”

That is why Badenoch should ask her advisers to complete their work, settle on a final proposal and ensure an Inheritance Tax policy is ready for her conference speech next month.

There is currently a policy vacuum sitting at the heart of British politics. Andy Burnham began his premiership by stating that we would have to wait until ‘later this year’ to hear his ten-year plan for the nation.

And, like the Chief in the Asterix comics who fears the sky may fall on his head tomorrow but reassures himself with the fact that tomorrow never actually comes, ‘later this year’ is proving to be an elastic deadline.

Badenoch has a golden opportunity to fill that Burnham-shaped void with a stance that is bold, radical and populist. She also has an opportunity to put some distance between herself and a Prime Minister who seems increasingly intent on leaning heavily on his party’s socialist traditions.

Perhaps even more crucially, she has an opportunity to define herself against the political threat to her Right.

This week has been dominated by the row over Reform’s acceptance of a combined £72million donation from two British crypto billionaires recently based abroad. But what was even more significant was Reform’s bone-headed reaction to Badenoch’s Inheritance Tax proposal.

READ MORE: Is Chicago Fire New Tonight? NBC Premiere Dates for Chicago Fire, Med and P.D.

One would expect a party that aspired to replace the Conservatives as the main opposition to an old-school, tax-and-spend Labour government would have recognised and embraced a policy that sought to reduce the tax burden on hard-working families. Instead, the party’s treasury spokesman Robert Jenrick made the incomprehensible statement that he believed the plan was ‘morally wrong’. It was, he said, ‘a tax cut predominantly for the well-off’.

Had Jenrick simply dismissed the proposal as something that did not align with Reform’s current fiscal priorities, that would have been one thing. But to claim there is something inherently immoral in people simply aspiring to pass on more of their wealth to their children was a staggering assertion. And one that is likely to cost him and his party dear.

Whether a policy pledge by Badenoch along these lines will have the same transformative effect on Tory fortunes as George Osborne’s momentous announcement almost two decades ago, is open to question. But now is not the time for timidity.

Because despite the denials, the plan taking shape inside Downing Street is clear. Burnham is preparing to call a snap election in the spring of next year. And, based on the current trajectory of the polls, he will almost certainly win it.

Reform’s collapse in support is accelerating. This time last year the party stood at 31 per cent in the polls, 11 points ahead of Labour and 14 points ahead of the Tories. Now they are two points behind Labour, a slender 4 points ahead of the Conservatives, and trending downwards. In just over a year, they have lost a third of their support, all at a time when Keir Starmer’s premiership was imploding.

Meanwhile, Nigel Farage’s personal approval ratings have become radioactive. According to the most recent poll, 24 per cent of people have a favourable opinion of Reform’s leader, while a staggering 69 per cent view him unfavourably. This represents the worst level of antipathy towards Farage since records began.

On these numbers, the idea of Reform securing a majority at the next election is for the birds. And that’s before you factor in the impact of tactical voting, the likely further erosion of support to Rupert Lowe’s insurgent hard-Right Restore party and the plethora of ongoing investigations into Reform’s increasingly murky finances.

The stark political reality is this: There is only one thing that will stop Burnham from calling a snap election and securing a five-year term in No 10. And that is a recovery for the Tory party along the lines we saw in 2007.

That would not require them to leapfrog Labour immediately.

Even after Osborne’s dramatic announcement, Brown still led in the polls for a time. But the shift in support in battleground seats that the policy precipitated was enough to make him think again.

That’s what the Tories need now. Not a miraculous resurgence. But a policy statement that will capture the attention and imagination of the British people. And that will demonstrate there is a party of the Right that provides them with a genuine and serious alternative to the Burnham government, not just an opportunity to register a protest.

Because Burnham remembers well the moment Brown hesitated – and lost. A member of that administration, he was subsequently asked what he thought about that decision. ‘Momentum is a curious thing in politics,’ he reflected. ‘Thousands of us who’ve worked around these jobs could sit in a room and try to work out how to get momentum and how not to lose momentum, but the truth is it hinges on the most unexpected little moments in politics.’

It will take something significant to force Andy Burnham to abandon his own plan for a snap election. Kemi Badenoch is the only person who could still do it. But she will have to be swift, and she will have to be bold.

Labor has announced a broad overhaul of Australia’s migration system, including plans to prevent international students from bringing family members, reduce access to extended working holiday visas and curb the practice of temporary migrants repeatedly changing visas to remain in the country.

The reforms will also focus on students who switch courses to extend their stay, tougher visitor visa settings, questionable protection visa claims and stronger action against people who remain in Australia after their visas expire.

Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke outlined the measures during an address to the National Press Club on Thursday, while cautioning that excessive cuts to migration could hurt the economy.

‘The times that we’ve had massive reductions too far in immigration have coincided with the worst economic times in Australia’s history. We need to be careful with it, and I’m being careful with it.’

Burke said the government was seeking to draw a sharper line between temporary and permanent migration pathways.

‘If you want to come on a temporary basis to Australia, apply for a temporary visa. If you want to come to Australia permanently, apply for a permanent visa. And if you no longer have a valid visa, you should leave Australia,’ he said.

Among the most significant changes, international students and graduate visa holders will no longer have an automatic right to bring family members to Australia.

‘For international students, we will no longer be allowing the attaching of family members for international students or for graduate visas,’ he said.

The changes will not affect partners or family members who are already in Australia on an existing visa.

Working holiday-makers will also face tougher rules when seeking to remain in Australia for a second or third year.

Backpackers will no longer automatically receive another working holiday visa even if they complete the required regional work. Instead, eligible applicants will enter a ballot.

The number of second-year visas will be capped at 45,000, compared with about 57,000 people who qualified last year.

The cut will be much sharper for third-year visas, with just 5,000 places available, compared with about 31,000 people who qualified last year.

‘Not everybody will get through because we need to have some control and certainty of what those numbers are.’

Visitor visas will also be tightened to prevent people entering Australia as tourists and then switching to another visa while onshore.

At present, a visitor can apply for another visa after arriving in Australia and potentially remain on a bridging visa while that application is processed.

Burke said the practice had contributed to visa-hopping and made authorities more reluctant to approve some genuine visitor visa applications.

Under the new system, many visitor visas will carry a ‘No further stay’ condition, generally preventing holders from applying for another visa while they remain in Australia.

International students will also be prevented from repeatedly moving between courses at the same or lower qualification level in an attempt to extend their stay.

‘You can go up the qualification scale, but only up the qualification scale,’ he said.

‘So, at the end of a bachelor degree, if you want to then do a master’s, that’s up the scale, that’s ok.’

Burke said the government was targeting cases where students finish one course before enrolling in another, often cheaper or lower-level qualification primarily to remain in Australia and work.

‘One of the classic areas of Visa hopping is people finish a course, hop to the next course, hop to the next,’ he said.

He said some students were moving to questionable education providers that offered cheaper courses with minimal attendance requirements.

‘Study with me. It will cost you less. We’re not very demanding on whether you attend anything. And you’ll be able to go for your life and get out there and work.’

The government is also planning a crackdown on what Burke described as disingenuous protection claims lodged by temporary migrants who have exhausted other options for remaining in Australia.

He said some applicants were being encouraged to lodge asylum claims despite having little prospect of success because the appeal process could allow them to continue living and working in Australia for years.

‘Put one in anyway and you’ll be able to wait out the appeal system, wait out the court system, you might get up to nine years working in Australia.’

Migration agents who encourage clients to lodge bogus claims could also face sanctions or deregistration.

The government will also ramp up enforcement against visa overstayers, with Burke seeking to revive the approach used before 2015 of directing people whose visas have expired to leave Australia and potentially detaining those who refuse.

An additional 100 compliance officers and 250 detention beds will be added to support the crackdown.

The government is examining existing facilities near airports as well as the former Melbourne quarantine facility for additional detention capacity.

Despite the crackdown, Burke rejected claims Australia was experiencing mass migration.

‘There are parts of the world where mass migration is something that they are dealing with. It is not something we’re dealing with in Australia,’ he said.

‘There was a peak post-pandemic, which was too high. There are reasons why it was too high and reasons why, logically, there was always going to be a peak.’

Burke also defended immigration as critical to the Australian economy, arguing that both regional communities and major cities relied heavily on overseas workers and international students.

‘It is true that immigration is critical to the economy of our regions. It is also true that immigration is critical to the economy of our cities as well,’ he said.

He said international education supported jobs far beyond universities, including cleaners, maintenance workers and businesses.

‘There’s a whole section of the economy in the cities that is only there because we have an important export industry in international students,’ Burke said.

‘Drastic cuts, wherever you make them, hurt the economy in every part, in every area.

‘We talk about the need for extra housing. It’s pretty hard to get a house built without having a plasterer involved.

‘In both Sydney and Melbourne, close to two-thirds of the plasterers we have were born overseas.

‘We need immigration. We just need to make sure that it is targeted to Australia’s needs, both in terms of numbers and across the different categories that work for our economy.’

Burke suggested the wrong type of migrants were often staying. 

‘There are individuals who would never, in fact, meet the qualifications to be able to become a permanent resident, and effectively jump from visa to visa, use the appeals process to be able to stay here as long as possible,’ he said.

‘It eventually becomes absurd not to just let them stay because, at that point, they have Australian-citizen children and, at that point, they are so integrated into a local community.’

Burke also rejected claims Australia’s housing shortage was primarily caused by immigration, arguing that falling household sizes had played a major role.

‘Housing, and the housing shortage we have, is not caused by immigration.

‘Anyone who looks at the migration program and wants to somehow say it was their fault, no. Australians have made a decision about how many people they want per household.’

Britain must confront dementia with the same determination that transformed cancer care, Baroness Louise Casey has said in an appeal to the Daily Mail.

Lady Casey, who chairs the Independent Commission on Adult Social Care, urged ministers to make dementia “Britain’s next great national mission – just as cancer was for previous generations”.

Her call follows a new report from Alzheimer’s Society and The King’s Fund, which warns that dementia care in England is still “stuck in the last century” and requires radical reform.

The report says the dramatic improvement in cancer survival rates over the past five decades offers policymakers a blueprint for improving dementia diagnosis, treatment and care. But with the population ageing rapidly and the number of cases climbing, it warns that action is increasingly urgent.

Lady Casey and Professor Sir Mike Richards, the former national cancer tsar, will press the Government to act when they speak at the Alzheimer’s Society annual conference in London today.

Writing for the Daily Mail, Lady Casey said: “Many people in this country will remember when cancer was widely seen as a death sentence, and little could be offered beyond making people as comfortable as possible in their final days.

“Since the 1970s we have largely transformed that story through decades of research, earlier diagnosis, public awareness, clinical trials and better treatments.

“This tremendous progress did not come from one miracle cure or one government.”

‘It came because the country decided that cancer mattered, deserved our national effort, and kept up the fight, year after year.

‘It is time we gave dementia that same seriousness and ambition.’

The Daily Mail and Alzheimer’s Society have partnered in a drive to defeat dementia, which claims 76,000 lives a year as Britain’s biggest killer.

Our Defeating Dementia campaign aims to raise awareness of the disease, in an effort to increase early diagnosis, boost research and improve care.

The number of people living with dementia in the UK is expected to rise from 1million to 1.4million by 2040, with the cost to the economy predicted to double.

The new report sets out the steps experts believe the government, NHS and social care leaders must take if dementia diagnosis, treatment, care and support is to make the same progress seen for cancer, where survival rates have almost doubled since the early 1970s.

It calls for strong leadership, clear targets for diagnosis and treatment, and a commitment to improving the quality of data.

Alzheimer’s Society has previously accused the NHS of treating dementia patients like ‘second-class citizens’ who are often ‘cast aside’ with little more than a leaflet.

And the Daily Mail revealed an 18-week diagnosis target for dementia appeared in early drafts of an upcoming government guidebook but was removed in later versions, raising fears the condition is not being treated as a priority.

However, the government has committed to appointing a ‘dementia tsar’, who charities hope will drive the kind of sustained change that transformed cancer care, and there are promising new drugs on the horizon.

As the first ‘cancer tsar’, appointed as National Cancer Director in 1999, Sir Mike oversaw three consecutive cancer strategies.

Speaking ahead of today’s event, he told the Daily Mail that ‘in many ways, dementia is where cancer was decades ago’ but there are ‘lessons to be learned’ and opportunities for dementia to ‘do a bit of catching up’.

Sir Mike added: ‘When I started working in cancer 50 years ago, an eminent professor asked me why I wanted to work in oncology, adding “Don’t they all die?”.

‘There was so little hope and ambition. But look at what we have managed to achieve.

‘While there are still real challenges in cancer, the progress made shows what can be possible when investment, collaboration, leadership and hope combine.

‘Today, what continues to make the difference are clear diagnosis and treatment pathways with timed targets, and a national registry that tracks progress.

‘Dementia deserves the same ambition that has transformed cancer care. Now is the time to build momentum.

‘The conditions are right for the incoming dementia tsar to lead a movement for change, but it will require everyone involved – patients, clinicians, health service managers, academics, charities, industry, together with ongoing political will – to deliver long-term change.’

The gulf between people’s experiences of dementia care and cancer care are further exposed in a new survey of 1,000 people caring for someone with dementia.

Around a quarter of respondents were able to make a direct comparison between diagnosis, treatment and support for both dementia and cancer.

Over half (51 per cent) said their experience of dementia care was worse and only one in ten (11 per cent) said it was better.

Sarah Woolnough, chief executive of The King’s Fund, said: ‘There was a time when cancer was thought of as a death sentence, frequently referred to as the “Big C”, such was the fear around a diagnosis.

‘Whilst still a major killer claiming far too many lives, many people are living well and after cancer and there has been a remarkable transformation in cancer outcomes in a relatively short space of time.

‘The same cannot be said for dementia care, with approaches to treatment still stuck in the 20th century.

‘There is ambition that this might be about to change, with recent major scientific advancements giving hope that dementia treatment on the cusp of a cancer-style revolution in care.

‘We will only be able to fulfil this potential if the health and care system is ready to diagnose dementia swiftly and roll out new innovations at scale.

RELATED: Third Victim Identified in Fiery Los Angeles Helicopter Crash

‘That is currently far from the case, and we believe that lessons can be learnt from the progress made in cancer.

‘The potential for wholesale change is within reach; policymakers now need to follow these steps in order to grasp it.’

Michelle Dyson, chief executive of Alzheimer’s Society, said: ‘If you have cancer, it is treated urgently, you get a specific diagnosis, and there is a clear pathway that takes you through your care and treatment.

‘With dementia, it can be years before you get a diagnosis and, all too often, people are sent home with a leaflet and little else.

‘Both are horrendous conditions, and there is still much to do for cancer care, but people’s experiences are worlds apart.

‘I know first-hand, as a former Director General in the Department of Health and Social Care, what happens when something is made a priority, with proper targets, investment, leadership and accountability. We desperately need this for dementia.

‘Urgency is critical. Dementia is the UK’s biggest killer and we cannot afford for this to take 50 years.

‘Government must make dementia a priority and learn what it can from cancer to create a future where dementia no longer devastates lives.’

Social care minister Alison McGovern will admit dementia has been ‘neglected for far too long’ when she delivers a speech at the conference.

She is expected to say: ‘Nowhere is the division between health and social care felt more sharply than by people living with dementia and their families – too often left to navigate a fragmented system at the most difficult time in their lives.

‘That is why, this year, we will publish the first ever Modern Service Framework for Frailty and Dementia, our guidebook for better support.

‘It will bring health and care workers together, adhering to a set of clear national standards, sharpening our priorities, and raising expectations of the help that people living with dementia and their families should receive.

‘We must put a floor under the kind of care that people can expect.

‘And we must improve quality of care, giving the workforce the direction and support it needs to reach those standards.

‘No one wants a future where we live longer but can do less. We want a future where our loved ones stay with us for more years with more joy and more life to live.’

• For confidential advice, call Alzheimer’s Society’s Dementia Support Line on 0333 150 3456