The Reform UK figurehead addressed the largest Reform UK rally held in Scotland to date, but avoided engaging with local journalists following the event. Instead, newly defected peer Malcolm Offord took on the task of field questions on claims of discriminatory behaviour and antisemitism linked to Farage.
Welcoming a New Recruit
The leader presented the ex-Tory lord and wealthy businessman during a sold-out rally of about 700 supporters in a hotel venue near Falkirk. Offord, who served as a junior minister for Scotland under the last government and most recently served as treasurer of the Scottish Conservatives, stated his plan to give up his peerage 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”.
Dodging the Press
Farage addressed the rally after a turbulent week which included him delivering a tirade against the BBC for questioning him regarding a report into alleged racist and remarks from his teenage years. But, Farage dodged a planned media briefing post-rally.
When asked why Farage did not make himself available to answer mounting allegations concerning his history, Offord said: “That is a question for him to answer.”
Pressed on if he thought an apology was necessary for his alleged remarks towards Jewish pupils, Offord said: “That is a matter for him to deliberate on with his team.”
Insisting on Fitness
Offord insisted that the leader is “morally fit” to be prime minister and denied he was employing coded political messaging. During his speech, the leader had reiterated on previous comments about pupils in Glasgow who are not native English speakers by asking the rally: “Who voted for the wholesale change of the population of Glasgow?”
While Scotland's First Minister criticised Farage’s original remarks as “discriminatory”, and Keir Starmer called them “toxic and divisive”, the defector argued that his new leader was “highlighting a factual issue that people are talking about on the doorstep”.
Growing Confidence
The event, attended by an energetic and enthused crowd of largely male, white and middle-aged supporters who bought tickets for the event, highlights Reform's increasing self-assurance ahead of the Scottish vote.
Although 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. Following Scottish Labour's decline, the party has often relegated it to third in recent months, polling up to 22%.
Declaring that Reform UK membership in Scotland had quadrupled in the past year to a running total of 12,000, 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, a local representative for the party, prompted a roar of approval as he described Farage as “the future PM of the UK”. He instructed the crowd to “prepare for a fight” as we take on the political establishment”, warning that “the next five months will be tough”.
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 expressed his pleasure 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 “wouldn’t get 20 people in a room”.
Local Context
As the event was taking place, not far away in the heart of Falkirk, anti-immigration and anti-racist protesters assembled for what have become regular weekly confrontations outside a local hotel where asylum seekers are now housed.
The organisers of the demonstrations stated they were motivated by a criminal case involving an asylum seeker. 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 source of a harmful narrative”.
He also made a clear distinction between those who hold far-right views and people with “legitimate points” about strain on public services or community safety.
