Conservative Candidate Joshua Bonehill-Paine Sparks Backlash Over Extremist Past
Former neo-Nazi Joshua Bonehill-Paine has become the center of a political controversy after being selected as the Conservative Party‘s candidate for a Somerset council seat, prompting criticism from Jewish organizations, political opponents and one of his former victims.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has defended the decision, saying Bonehill-Paine has renounced his extremist views and deserves the opportunity to rebuild his life.
Bonehill-Paine’s candidacy has become a test of how rehabilitation should influence political selection, with Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch arguing that people who have served their sentences and renounced extremist views deserve a second chance, while critics, including former Labour MP Luciana Berger and Jewish organizations, say his history of antisemitic hate crimes makes him unsuitable for elected office despite his claims of rehabilitation.
Why is Bonehill-Paine’s Candidacy Controversial?
Bonehill-Paine first gained notoriety during the early 2010s through online far-right activism and neo-Nazi content. In 2015, he was convicted over a campaign of racially aggravated harassment targeting then-Labour MP Luciana Berger, who is Jewish. He also faced convictions linked to inciting hatred against Jews and other criminal offenses, serving more than three years in prison.
Since leaving prison, Bonehill-Paine says he has rejected extremism and has worked with counter-extremism initiatives, including participating in the UK’s Prevent de-radicalization program. He has also said he gives talks about antisemitism and radicalization while working with schools, universities and police organizations.
More recently, he has re-emerged in recent years as the creator of the Crewkerne Gazette, a satirical online account that has gained a cult following.
Bonehill-Paine also has a conviction for assaulting a police officer and burglary of a police station, and was convicted in 2014 of malicious communications over an anti-Islam hoax that led to death threats against the owners of a pub in Leicester.
He was jailed in 2015 for more than three years after posting “vile” antisemitic material online ahead of a planned neo-Nazi rally.
In 2016, he was found guilty of racially aggravated harassment for abuse directed at the then Labour MP Luciana Berger, who is Jewish, which included posting messages to his blog calling Berger a “rodent” and an “evil money-grabber.” He also founded and led the National British Resistance, a far-right group.
Response to Bonehill-Paine’s Selection
The Conservative Party’s decision has divided opinion on this candidacy. Luciana Berger said Bonehill-Paine’s actions caused lasting harm and argued that rehabilitation should not automatically qualify someone for elected office.
Jewish organizations, including the Board of Deputies of British Jews, have also criticized the selection, saying his previous offenses remain too serious for public office.
Critics have questioned the party’s vetting process, arguing that selecting a candidate with multiple convictions for antisemitic offenses undermines efforts to combat hate speech and extremism.
Speaking after the controversy escalated, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch defended Bonehill-Paine’s candidacy, saying society should recognize genuine rehabilitation.
Badenoch said Bonehill-Paine had renounced his previous beliefs, completed rehabilitation work and should not be permanently barred from local public service because of crimes for which he had already served his sentence. She distinguished between serving as a local councillor and holding national political office.
Bonehill-Paine has also publicly apologized for his previous actions and said his criminal record is now spent under UK law. He has maintained that local Conservative officials were aware of his past before selecting him.
While the former neo-Nazi remains the Conservative candidate for the Somerset council election, although pressure continues to mount on the party over its decision.
The controversy has become a broader debate over whether rehabilitation should restore eligibility for public office, or whether certain criminal histories, particularly hate crimes, should permanently disqualify political candidates.
