Nigel Farage addressed the largest Reform UK public meeting so far in Scotland, but declined to speak with the press corps afterwards. In his place, recently switched peer Malcolm Offord was left to responding to queries on allegations of racism and antisemitism linked to Farage.
A High-Profile Defection
Farage introduced the former Conservative peer and millionaire donor at a packed event of about 700 attendees at a hotel conference centre in central Scotland. The businessman, who worked as a junior minister for Scotland in the previous administration and most recently served as treasurer of the Scottish Conservatives, stated his plan to relinquish his seat in the Lords in order to become a candidate for the party in the upcoming Scottish parliament vote.
The leader stated he was “extremely pleased” to welcome the new member. He described the switch as “a courageous and significant move”.
Avoiding Media Scrutiny
The Reform leader addressed the rally after a turbulent week which saw him launch a tirade against the BBC for questioning him regarding a report into claimed discriminatory and antisemitic behaviour from his teenage years. However, the leader avoided a planned media briefing post-rally.
Questioned why his new party’s leader was not available to address growing claims concerning his history, Offord said: “You’ll need to ask him that question.”
Pressed on if he thought Farage should apologise for his alleged remarks about Jewish students, Offord said: “That is a matter for him to deliberate on with his team.”
Insisting on Fitness
The peer maintained that Farage was “morally fit” to be the country's leader and denied he was employing coded political messaging. While addressing supporters, Farage had doubled down on previous comments about pupils in Glasgow who are not native English speakers by posing the question to the crowd: “Who voted for the wholesale change of the population of Glasgow?”
While the first minister, John Swinney condemned the initial comments as “racist”, and Keir Starmer called them “toxic and divisive”, the defector argued that Farage was “drawing attention to a real concern” that “voters are discussing”.
A Party on the Rise
The rally, filled with an energetic and enthused crowd of predominantly older, white male backers who each paid £6 to attend, highlights Reform's increasing self-assurance ahead of the Scottish vote.
While the Scottish National Party remains ahead, Reform UK has gained significant ground in the past year, achieving a quarter of the vote in a recent parliamentary by-election. Following Scottish Labour's decline, the party has often relegated it to third lately, with support reaching over a fifth.
Announcing that party membership north of the border had increased fourfold over the last twelve months to 12,000 members, the party chair, David Bull said he believed it could gain up to 20 MSPs in May, which would place Reform in “a powerful situation” at Holyrood.
Fighting Talk
Thomas Kerr, one of Reform’s 19 Scottish councillors, prompted a roar of approval as he referred to the leader as “the future PM of the UK”. 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 “take on the green blob and the net-zero grifters”.
Farage himself expressed his pleasure at the party’s emergence as a force in Scottish politics in the last year, confessing to supporters that in previous years he had been warned he “couldn't fill a small venue”.
Local Context
Meanwhile, not far away in Falkirk town centre, demonstrators with opposing views assembled for a now-regular weekly standoff outside a local hotel used to accommodate asylum seekers.
The organisers of the demonstrations stated they were motivated by a serious local crime. Speaking previously, First Minister John Swinney warned that “what the far right do is to apportion the blame … to asylum seekers or migrants and I think that is the source of a harmful narrative”.
He also made a clear distinction extremist opinions and people with “valid concerns” about pressure on local services or community safety.
