Nigel Farage addressed the largest the party's public meeting held in Scotland to date, but avoided engaging with local journalists following the event. In his place, newly defected member of the House of Lords Malcolm Offord took on the task of responding to queries on claims of discriminatory behaviour and antisemitism linked to the party leader.
Welcoming a New Recruit
Farage introduced the ex-Tory lord and millionaire donor during a packed event of about 700 attendees in a hotel venue in central Scotland. Offord, who served as a Scotland Office minister in the previous administration and was until recently treasurer of the Scottish Conservatives, stated his plan to relinquish his seat in the Lords in order to stand for Reform UK in next May’s Holyrood elections.
Farage said he was “delighted” to greet the new member. He described the switch as “a courageous and significant move”.
Dodging the Press
The Reform leader spoke to the crowd after a turbulent week which saw him launch a fierce criticism of the broadcaster for questioning him about an investigation into alleged racist and antisemitic behaviour as a youth. However, Farage dodged the expected press huddle post-rally.
When asked 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 whether he believed an apology was necessary for the comments he is said to have made towards Jewish pupils, he stated: “That is a matter for him to deliberate on with his team.”
Defending the Leader
Offord insisted that the leader is “ethically suitable” to be the country's leader and rejected claims of dog-whistle politics. During his speech, the leader had reiterated on his remarks about pupils in Glasgow who speak English as a second language by posing the question to the crowd: “Who voted for the wholesale change of the population of Glasgow?”
Although the first minister, John Swinney condemned the initial comments as “racist”, and Keir Starmer labeled them “harmful and polarising”, the defector argued that Farage was “highlighting a factual issue that people are talking about on the doorstep”.
A Party on the Rise
The rally, attended by an energetic and enthused crowd of largely male, white and middle-aged supporters who each paid £6 to attend, highlights Reform's increasing self-assurance ahead of the Scottish vote.
While the SNP continues to lead in the polls, Reform UK has gained significant ground recently, securing 26% of the vote in its first Holyrood byelection test. After the collapse in support for Scottish Labour, the party has often relegated it to third lately, with support reaching over a fifth.
Announcing that Reform UK membership in Scotland had quadrupled in the past year to 12,000 members, a senior party official stated his belief it could gain up to 20 MSPs in May, which would place Reform in “a very strong position” at Holyrood.
Fighting Talk
Thomas Kerr, one of Reform’s 19 Scottish councillors, elicited loud cheers as he described Farage as “the future PM of the UK”. He instructed the crowd to “man the barricades as we “challenge the ruling class”, cautioning that “the coming campaign will be difficult”.
Despite not yet publishing a distinct policy platform for Scotland, representatives vowed the party would “take on the green blob and the net-zero grifters”.
Farage himself underlined his delight at the party’s emergence as a force in Scottish politics over the past 12 months, confessing to supporters that in previous years he had been warned he “wouldn’t get 20 people in a room”.
Local Context
Meanwhile, not far away in the heart of Falkirk, anti-immigration and anti-racist protesters were gathering for what have become regular weekly confrontations near a hotel where asylum seekers are now housed.
A group coordinating protests said it was galvanised by a serious local crime. Speaking previously, First Minister John Swinney cautioned that “what the far right do is to apportion the blame … to new arrivals and I think that is the root of the poison”.
He also made a clear distinction between those who hold far-right views and people with “valid concerns” about pressure on local services or community safety.
