The Reform UK figurehead addressed the largest the party's rally so far in Scotland, but avoided engaging with local journalists afterwards. In his place, newly defected member of the House of Lords Malcolm Offord was left to field questions on allegations of racism and anti-Jewish sentiment surrounding the party leader.
Welcoming a New Recruit
The leader presented the ex-Tory lord and wealthy businessman at a packed event 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 most recently served as treasurer of the Scottish Conservatives, stated his plan to give up his peerage in order to stand for the party in next May’s Holyrood elections.
Farage said he was “extremely pleased” to greet Offord to the party. He called the peer’s defection as “a courageous and significant move”.
Dodging the Press
Farage spoke to the crowd following a difficult period which saw him launch a fierce criticism of the broadcaster for questioning him regarding a report into alleged racist and remarks as a youth. But, Farage dodged the expected press huddle post-rally.
When asked why Farage did not make himself available to answer mounting allegations concerning his history, the new recruit responded: “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.”
Defending the Leader
Offord insisted that Farage was “ethically suitable” to be prime minister and denied he was employing coded political messaging. During his speech, Farage had doubled down on his remarks about pupils in Glasgow who speak English as a second language by asking the rally: “Who authorised the complete transformation of Glasgow's demographics?”
While the first minister, John Swinney condemned the initial comments as “discriminatory”, and Keir Starmer labeled them “toxic and divisive”, Offord maintained that Farage was “highlighting a factual issue that “voters are discussing”.
A Party on the Rise
The event, filled with an lively and passionate audience of largely male, white and middle-aged supporters who each paid £6 to attend, showcases Reform's increasing self-assurance ahead of the Scottish vote.
While the Scottish National Party remains ahead, Reform UK 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, polling up to 22%.
Declaring that Reform UK membership in Scotland 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.
Campaign Rhetoric
A Reform councillor, a local representative for the party, elicited loud cheers as he referred to the leader as “the future PM of the UK”. He told supporters to “man the barricades as we “challenge the ruling class”, warning that “the next five months will be tough”.
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”.
Farage himself underlined his delight at Reform's rise as a significant player in the political scene in Scotland in the last year, admitting to the audience that he was once told he “wouldn’t get 20 people in a room”.
Local Context
As the event was taking place, not far away in Falkirk town centre, anti-immigration and anti-racist protesters were gathering for what have become regular weekly confrontations outside a local hotel used to accommodate asylum seekers.
A group coordinating protests stated they were motivated by a criminal case involving an asylum seeker. In an interview, 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 “legitimate points” about pressure on local services or neighbourhood security.
