Nigel Farage spoke to the biggest Reform UK public meeting so far in Scotland, however avoided engaging with local journalists following the event. Instead, newly defected member of the House of Lords Malcolm Offord was left to responding to queries on allegations of racism and antisemitism linked to Farage.
A High-Profile Defection
Farage introduced the ex-Tory lord and wealthy businessman during a packed event of roughly seven hundred supporters at a hotel conference centre near Falkirk. Offord, who served as a Scotland Office minister 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 next May’s Holyrood elections.
Farage said he was “extremely pleased” to greet the new member. He described the switch as “a brave and historic act”.
Dodging the Press
Farage addressed the rally after a turbulent week which included him delivering a fierce criticism of the broadcaster after they quizzed him regarding a report into alleged racist and remarks as a youth. But, the leader avoided the expected press huddle after Saturday’s event.
When asked why Farage did not make himself available to address growing claims concerning his history, the new recruit responded: “That is a question for him to answer.”
Pressed on whether he believed Farage should apologise for the comments he is said to have made about Jewish students, he stated: “I think that’s something he’ll need to consider with his own advisers.”
Insisting on Fitness
The peer maintained that the leader is “ethically suitable” to be the country's leader and denied he was employing dog-whistle politics. During his speech, Farage had doubled down on previous comments 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?”
Although the first minister, John Swinney criticised the initial comments as “discriminatory”, and Keir Starmer labeled them “toxic and divisive”, the defector argued that his new leader was “highlighting a factual issue that “voters are discussing”.
Growing Confidence
The event, filled with an lively and passionate audience of predominantly older, white male backers who each paid £6 to attend, showcases the party’s growing confidence ahead of the Scottish vote.
While the SNP continues to lead in the polls, the party has gained significant ground recently, achieving a quarter of the vote in a recent parliamentary by-election. After the collapse in support for Scottish Labour, the party has often relegated it to third in recent months, polling up to 22%.
Announcing that Reform UK membership in Scotland had increased fourfold in the past year to 12,000 members, the party chair, David Bull 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, 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”.
Despite not yet publishing any Scotland-specific policies, speakers from the north-east vowed the party would “take on the green blob and the net-zero grifters”.
Farage himself expressed his pleasure at Reform's rise as a significant player in Scottish politics in the last year, confessing to supporters 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 the heart of Falkirk, demonstrators with opposing views assembled for a now-regular weekly standoff near a hotel where asylum seekers are now housed.
A group coordinating protests stated they were motivated by a serious local crime. Speaking previously, First Minister John Swinney warned that the tactic of the far-right 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 between those who hold far-right views and people with “valid concerns” about pressure on local services or neighbourhood security.
