🔗 Share this article

Nigel Farage addressed the biggest Reform UK rally so far in Scotland, but avoided engaging with local journalists afterwards. In his place, newly defected peer Malcolm Offord took on the task of responding to queries on claims of discriminatory behaviour and antisemitism surrounding Farage.

A High-Profile Defection

Farage introduced the ex-Tory lord and millionaire donor at a sold-out rally 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 most recently served as treasurer of the Scottish Conservatives, stated his plan to give up his peerage in order to become a candidate for Reform UK in next May’s Holyrood elections.

The leader stated he was “delighted” to greet the new member. He described the switch as “a brave and historic act”.

Dodging the Press

The Reform leader addressed the rally following a difficult period which saw him launch a tirade against the BBC after they quizzed him about an investigation into claimed discriminatory and remarks from his teenage years. But, Farage dodged the expected press huddle after Saturday’s event.

When asked why Farage was not available to answer mounting allegations about his past behaviour, Offord said: “You’ll need to ask him that question.”

Pressed on if he thought an apology was necessary for his alleged remarks about Jewish students, he stated: “That is a matter for him to deliberate on with his team.”

Insisting on Fitness

The peer maintained that Farage was “ethically suitable” to be prime minister and denied he was employing dog-whistle politics. During his speech, the leader had reiterated on previous comments about pupils in Glasgow who speak English as a second language by asking the rally: “Who authorised the complete transformation of Glasgow's demographics?”

While the first minister, John Swinney criticised Farage’s original remarks as “discriminatory”, and the Labour leader labeled them “toxic and divisive”, Offord maintained that Farage was “highlighting a factual issue that people are talking about on the doorstep”.

Growing Confidence

The event, filled with an energetic and enthused crowd of largely male, white and middle-aged supporters who each paid £6 to attend, highlights the party’s growing confidence before next May’s elections.

While the SNP continues to lead in the polls, the party has made substantial progress in the past year, 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 in recent months, polling up to 22%.

Declaring that Reform UK membership in Scotland had quadrupled in the past year to 12,000 members, the party chair, David Bull stated his belief it could win around twenty parliamentary seats in May, which would place Reform in “a very strong position” at Holyrood.

Fighting Talk

A Reform councillor, a local representative for the party, 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”, cautioning that “the next five months will be tough”.

Despite not yet publishing a distinct policy platform for Scotland, representatives vowed the party would “take on the green blob and the net-zero grifters”.

The leader personally expressed his pleasure at the party’s emergence as a force in the political scene in Scotland over the past 12 months, confessing to supporters that in previous years he had been warned he “couldn't fill a small venue”.

Local Context

Meanwhile, not far away in Falkirk town centre, anti-immigration and anti-racist protesters assembled for a now-regular weekly standoff outside a local hotel where asylum seekers are now housed.

A group coordinating protests stated they were motivated by a serious local crime. In an interview, First Minister John Swinney cautioned that “what the far right do 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.