Nigel Farage addressed the largest Reform UK rally so far in Scotland, however declined to speak with the press corps afterwards. Instead, newly defected member of the House of Lords the former Conservative donor was left to field questions on allegations of racism and antisemitism linked to Farage.
A High-Profile Defection
Farage introduced the former Conservative peer and wealthy businessman at a sold-out rally of about 700 supporters at a hotel conference centre in central Scotland. Offord, who served as a junior minister for Scotland under the last government and most recently served as treasurer of the Scottish Conservatives, 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 “delighted” to welcome Offord to the party. He described the switch as “a brave and historic act”.
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 about an investigation into alleged racist and remarks from his teenage years. However, Farage dodged a planned media briefing post-rally.
When asked why Farage was not available to answer mounting allegations concerning his history, Offord said: “That is a question for him to answer.”
Challenged about whether he believed an apology was necessary for his alleged remarks towards Jewish pupils, he stated: “That is a matter for him to deliberate on with his team.”
Defending the Leader
The peer maintained that Farage was “morally fit” to be prime minister and denied he was employing dog-whistle politics. During his speech, Farage had doubled down on his remarks about pupils in Glasgow who speak English as a second language by posing the question to the crowd: “Who authorised the complete transformation of Glasgow's demographics?”
Although Scotland's First Minister condemned Farage’s original remarks as “racist”, and the Labour leader called them “toxic and divisive”, Offord maintained that Farage was “drawing attention to a real concern” that “voters are discussing”.
Growing Confidence
The event, attended by an energetic and enthused crowd of predominantly older, white male backers who each paid £6 to attend, highlights the party’s growing confidence ahead of the Scottish vote.
Although the Scottish National Party remains ahead, Reform UK has made substantial progress in the past year, 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 lately, with support reaching over a fifth.
Announcing that Reform UK membership in Scotland had increased fourfold in the past year to 12,000 members, a senior party official 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, one of Reform’s 19 Scottish councillors, prompted a roar of approval as he referred to the leader as “Britain’s next prime minister”. He instructed the crowd to “man the barricades as we take on the political establishment”, warning that “the coming campaign will be difficult”.
Despite not yet publishing any Scotland-specific policies, speakers from the north-east pledged Reform 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 over the past 12 months, admitting to the audience that in previous years he had been warned he “wouldn’t get 20 people in a room”.
Protests Nearby
As the event was taking place, not far away in Falkirk town centre, demonstrators with opposing views were gathering for what have become regular weekly confrontations outside a local hotel used to accommodate asylum seekers.
A group coordinating protests said it was galvanised by a criminal case involving an asylum seeker. In an interview, Scotland's leader warned that the tactic of the far-right is to apportion the blame … to new arrivals and I think that is the root of the poison”.
He also made a clear distinction extremist opinions and people with “legitimate points” about pressure on local services or neighbourhood security.
