Nigel Farage addressed the biggest the party's rally held in Scotland to date, but avoided engaging with the press corps afterwards. In his place, newly defected peer Malcolm Offord was left to field questions on allegations of racism and anti-Jewish sentiment surrounding the party leader.
Welcoming a New Recruit
Farage introduced the ex-Tory lord and wealthy businessman during a packed event of about 700 supporters at a hotel conference centre near Falkirk. Offord, who served as a Scotland Office minister under the last government and most recently served as treasurer of the Scottish Conservatives, stated his plan to relinquish his seat in the Lords in order to stand for the party in the upcoming Scottish parliament vote.
Farage said he was “delighted” to greet Offord to the party. He called the peer’s defection as “a courageous and significant move”.
Avoiding Media Scrutiny
Farage addressed the rally after a turbulent week which included him delivering a fierce criticism of the broadcaster for questioning him regarding a report into alleged racist and antisemitic behaviour as a youth. However, Farage dodged the expected press huddle after Saturday’s event.
When asked why Farage did not make himself available to answer mounting allegations concerning his history, the new recruit responded: “That is a question for him to answer.”
Challenged about whether he believed an apology was necessary for the comments he is said to have made about Jewish students, Offord said: “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 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 are not native English speakers by posing the question to the crowd: “Who authorised the complete transformation of Glasgow's demographics?”
While the first minister, John Swinney condemned Farage’s original remarks as “discriminatory”, and Keir Starmer labeled them “harmful and polarising”, the defector argued that Farage was “drawing attention to a real concern” that “voters are discussing”.
Growing Confidence
The event, attended by an lively and passionate audience of largely male, white and middle-aged supporters who each paid £6 to attend, showcases the party’s growing confidence before next May’s elections.
Although the SNP continues to lead in the polls, Reform UK has gained significant ground recently, achieving a quarter 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, polling up to 22%.
Announcing that Reform UK membership in Scotland had quadrupled in the past year to a running total of 12,000, the party chair, David Bull said he believed it could win around twenty parliamentary seats in May, which would place Reform in “a very strong position” at Holyrood.
Campaign Rhetoric
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 instructed the crowd to “man the barricades as we “challenge the ruling class”, warning that “the next five months will be tough”.
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”.
The leader personally underlined his delight at Reform's rise as a significant player in Scottish politics in the last year, confessing to supporters that he was once told he “couldn't fill a small venue”.
Protests Nearby
Meanwhile, a few miles west in Falkirk town centre, anti-immigration and anti-racist protesters were gathering for a now-regular weekly standoff near a hotel used to accommodate asylum seekers.
A group coordinating protests stated they were motivated by a serious local crime. In an interview, Scotland's leader cautioned 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 “valid concerns” about pressure on local services or community safety.
