The Reform UK figurehead addressed the largest Reform UK public meeting so far in Scotland, but declined to speak with the press corps afterwards. In his place, newly defected peer the former Conservative donor took on the task of field questions on claims of discriminatory behaviour and antisemitism linked to Farage.
A High-Profile Defection
The leader presented the ex-Tory lord and millionaire donor at a sold-out rally of about 700 supporters in a hotel venue in central Scotland. Offord, who served as a Scotland Office minister in the previous administration and was until recently treasurer of the Scottish Conservatives, announced his intention to give up his peerage in order to stand for Reform UK in the upcoming Scottish parliament vote.
The leader stated he was “delighted” to greet the new member. He described the switch as “a courageous and significant move”.
Avoiding Media Scrutiny
The Reform leader spoke to the crowd after a turbulent week which saw him launch a fierce criticism of the broadcaster after they quizzed him regarding a report into alleged racist and remarks from his teenage years. But, Farage dodged a planned media briefing after Saturday’s event.
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 Farage should apologise for his alleged remarks towards Jewish pupils, he stated: “That is a matter for him to deliberate on with his team.”
Defending the Leader
Offord insisted that Farage was “morally fit” to be prime minister and rejected claims of coded political messaging. While addressing supporters, Farage had doubled down on previous comments about the number of Glasgow schoolchildren who speak English as a second language by asking the rally: “Who voted for the wholesale change of the population of Glasgow?”
Although the first minister, John Swinney condemned the initial comments as “discriminatory”, and Keir Starmer called them “harmful and polarising”, the defector argued that his new leader was “drawing attention to a real concern” that “voters are discussing”.
A Party on the Rise
The event, attended by an energetic and enthused crowd of largely male, white and middle-aged supporters who bought tickets for the event, highlights the party’s growing confidence ahead of the Scottish vote.
While the SNP continues to lead in the polls, Reform UK has gained significant ground recently, securing 26% of the vote in a recent parliamentary by-election. After the collapse in support for Scottish Labour, Reform has regularly pushed it into third place lately, with support reaching over a fifth.
Announcing that party membership north of the border had quadrupled in the past year to a running total of 12,000, the party chair, David Bull stated his belief it could win around twenty parliamentary seats in May, putting the party in “a powerful situation” at Holyrood.
Fighting Talk
A Reform councillor, 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 “man the barricades as we take on the political establishment”, warning that “the coming campaign will be difficult”.
Despite not yet publishing a distinct policy platform for Scotland, representatives pledged Reform would “take on the green blob and the net-zero grifters”.
The leader personally expressed his pleasure at Reform's rise as a significant player 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”.
Local Context
Meanwhile, a few miles west in the heart of Falkirk, anti-immigration and anti-racist protesters were gathering for what have become regular weekly confrontations near a hotel used to accommodate asylum seekers.
A group coordinating protests said it was galvanised by a serious local crime. Speaking previously, 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 source of a harmful narrative”.
However, he differentiated extremist opinions and people with “valid concerns” about pressure on local services or community safety.
