Nigel Farage addressed the biggest Reform UK public meeting so far in Scotland, however avoided engaging with local journalists following the event. In his place, recently switched peer Malcolm Offord was left to field questions on claims of discriminatory behaviour and anti-Jewish sentiment linked to Farage.
A High-Profile Defection
Farage introduced the former Conservative peer and millionaire donor during 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 was until recently treasurer of the Scottish Conservatives, announced his intention to give up his peerage in order to become a candidate for the party in the upcoming Scottish parliament vote.
Farage said he was “delighted” to welcome the new member. He called the peer’s defection as “a brave and historic act”.
Dodging the Press
Farage spoke to the crowd 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 as a youth. However, Farage dodged a planned media briefing after Saturday’s event.
When asked why Farage did not make himself available to address growing claims about his past behaviour, the new recruit responded: “That is a question for him to answer.”
Challenged about whether he believed Farage should apologise for his alleged remarks about Jewish students, he stated: “That is a matter for him to deliberate on with his team.”
Insisting on Fitness
Offord insisted 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 previous comments about pupils in Glasgow who speak English as a second language by asking the rally: “Who voted for the wholesale change of the population of Glasgow?”
Although Scotland's First Minister condemned Farage’s original remarks as “racist”, and Keir Starmer called them “harmful and polarising”, Offord maintained that Farage was “drawing attention to a real concern” that people are talking about on the doorstep”.
Growing Confidence
The rally, attended by an lively and passionate audience of largely male, white and middle-aged supporters who bought tickets for the event, showcases the party’s growing confidence ahead of the Scottish vote.
While the SNP continues to lead in the polls, the party has made substantial progress recently, achieving a quarter of the vote in a recent parliamentary by-election. Following Scottish Labour's decline, Reform has regularly pushed it into third place lately, polling up to 22%.
Announcing that party membership north of the border 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 very strong position” at Holyrood.
Fighting Talk
Thomas Kerr, one of Reform’s 19 Scottish councillors, elicited loud cheers 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 a distinct policy platform for Scotland, speakers from the north-east vowed the party would “take on the green blob and the net-zero grifters”.
Farage himself underlined his delight at Reform's rise as a significant player in Scottish politics in the last year, admitting to the audience that he was once told he “couldn't fill a small venue”.
Local Context
As the event was taking place, not far away in Falkirk town centre, demonstrators with opposing views were gathering for a now-regular weekly standoff outside a local hotel where asylum seekers are now housed.
A group coordinating protests said it was galvanised by a criminal case involving an asylum seeker. Speaking previously, Scotland's leader cautioned that the tactic of the far-right is to assign responsibility … to new arrivals 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.
