Nigel Farage addressed the biggest the party's rally so far in Scotland, however declined to speak with local journalists afterwards. In his place, newly defected member of the House of Lords Malcolm Offord was left to field questions on claims of discriminatory behaviour and anti-Jewish sentiment linked to Farage.
A High-Profile Defection
The leader presented the former Conservative peer and wealthy businessman 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 was until recently the Scottish Tory party's chief financial officer, stated his plan to give up his peerage in order to stand for Reform UK in the upcoming Scottish parliament vote.
Farage said he was “delighted” to greet Offord to the party. 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 for questioning him regarding a report into alleged racist and antisemitic behaviour from his teenage years. But, the leader avoided the expected press huddle after Saturday’s event.
Questioned why his new party’s leader was not available to answer mounting allegations about his past behaviour, Offord said: “You’ll need to ask him that question.”
Pressed on whether he believed Farage should apologise for his alleged remarks towards Jewish pupils, Offord said: “I think that’s something he’ll need to consider with his own advisers.”
Defending the Leader
Offord insisted that Farage was “ethically suitable” to be the country's leader and rejected claims of dog-whistle politics. During his speech, Farage had doubled down on his remarks about the number of Glasgow schoolchildren who speak English as a second language by asking the rally: “Who authorised the complete transformation of Glasgow's demographics?”
While Scotland's First Minister condemned Farage’s original remarks as “racist”, and the Labour leader called them “toxic and divisive”, Offord maintained that Farage was “highlighting a factual issue that “voters are discussing”.
A Party on the Rise
The event, filled with an lively and passionate audience of largely male, white and middle-aged supporters who each paid £6 to attend, highlights the party’s growing confidence ahead of the Scottish vote.
Although the Scottish National Party remains ahead, Reform UK has made substantial progress recently, securing 26% of the vote in a recent parliamentary by-election. 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 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, one of Reform’s 19 Scottish councillors, prompted a roar of approval as he described Farage as “Britain’s next prime minister”. He instructed the crowd to “man the barricades 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, representatives pledged Reform would “take on the green blob and the net-zero grifters”.
The leader personally underlined his delight at the party’s emergence as a force in the political scene in Scotland over the past 12 months, confessing to supporters that he was once told he “couldn't fill a small venue”.
Protests Nearby
Meanwhile, not far away in the heart of Falkirk, anti-immigration and anti-racist protesters were gathering for a now-regular weekly standoff near a hotel where asylum seekers are now housed.
The organisers of the demonstrations said it was galvanised by a serious local crime. In an interview, First Minister John Swinney cautioned that the tactic of the far-right is to assign responsibility … to asylum seekers or migrants and I think that is the source of a harmful narrative”.
However, he differentiated extremist opinions and people with “legitimate points” about strain on public services or neighbourhood security.
