🔗 Share this article

The Reform UK figurehead spoke to the biggest the party's rally so far in Scotland, but avoided engaging with local journalists afterwards. In his place, recently switched peer the former Conservative donor was left to responding to queries on allegations of racism and antisemitism linked to the party leader.

A High-Profile Defection

The leader presented the former Conservative peer and millionaire donor during a sold-out rally of about 700 supporters in a hotel venue in central Scotland. The businessman, who worked as a junior minister for Scotland under the last government and was until recently the Scottish Tory party's chief financial officer, announced his intention to give up his peerage in order to stand for the party in the upcoming Scottish parliament vote.

Farage said he was “delighted” to greet Offord to the party. He described the switch as “a courageous and significant move”.

Dodging the Press

Farage addressed the rally after a turbulent week which saw him launch a fierce criticism of the broadcaster after they quizzed him regarding a report into alleged racist and antisemitic behaviour from his teenage years. But, the leader avoided a planned media briefing post-rally.

When asked why Farage was not available to address growing claims about his past behaviour, Offord said: “You’ll need to ask him that question.”

Challenged about whether he believed an apology was necessary for his alleged remarks towards Jewish pupils, he stated: “I think that’s something he’ll need to consider with his own advisers.”

Insisting on Fitness

The peer maintained that Farage was “morally fit” to be the country's leader and rejected claims of coded political messaging. During his speech, Farage had doubled down on his remarks about the number of Glasgow schoolchildren who are not native English speakers by asking the rally: “Who voted for the wholesale change of the population of Glasgow?”

While the first minister, John Swinney condemned Farage’s original remarks as “racist”, and Keir Starmer labeled them “toxic and divisive”, the defector argued that his new leader was “highlighting a factual issue that “voters are discussing”.

A Party on the Rise

The event, attended by an energetic and enthused crowd of largely male, white and middle-aged supporters who bought tickets for the event, highlights the party’s growing confidence ahead of the Scottish vote.

While the SNP continues to lead in the polls, the party has made substantial progress recently, securing 26% of the vote in its first Holyrood byelection test. After the collapse in support for Scottish Labour, Reform has regularly pushed it into third place lately, with support reaching over a fifth.

Announcing that Reform UK membership in Scotland had quadrupled in the past year to a running total of 12,000, the party chair, David Bull said he believed it could gain up to 20 MSPs in May, putting the party in “a powerful situation” at Holyrood.

Campaign Rhetoric

A Reform councillor, a local representative for the party, elicited loud cheers as he referred to the leader as “Britain’s next prime minister”. He told supporters to “prepare for a fight” as we take on the political establishment”, cautioning that “the coming campaign will be difficult”.

Although the party has yet to produce any Scotland-specific policies, representatives vowed the party would “confront climate activists and those profiting from green policies”.

The leader personally expressed his pleasure at the party’s emergence as a force in Scottish politics in the last year, admitting to the audience that he was once told he “wouldn’t get 20 people in a room”.

Local Context

Meanwhile, a few miles west in Falkirk town centre, demonstrators with opposing views assembled for a now-regular weekly standoff near a hotel where asylum seekers are now housed.

The organisers of the demonstrations stated they were motivated by a criminal case involving an asylum seeker. Speaking previously, Scotland's leader warned that “what the far right do is to apportion the blame … to new arrivals and I think that is the source of a harmful narrative”.

He also made a clear distinction between those who hold far-right views and people with “legitimate points” about strain on public services or neighbourhood security.