The Reform UK figurehead spoke to the biggest Reform UK public meeting so far in Scotland, however declined to speak with local journalists following the event. Instead, recently switched member of the House of Lords the former Conservative donor was left to field questions on allegations of racism and antisemitism surrounding Farage.
Welcoming a New Recruit
Farage introduced the ex-Tory lord and wealthy businessman during a sold-out rally of about 700 supporters in a hotel venue in central Scotland. The businessman, who worked as a Scotland Office minister under the last government and most recently served as treasurer of the Scottish Conservatives, announced his intention to give up his peerage in order to become a candidate for the party in the upcoming Scottish parliament vote.
The leader stated he was “delighted” to greet Offord to the party. He called the peer’s defection as “a brave and historic act”.
Dodging the Press
Farage spoke to the crowd after a turbulent week which saw him launch a tirade against the BBC for questioning him about an investigation into alleged racist and remarks as a youth. However, the leader avoided a planned media briefing after Saturday’s event.
When asked why Farage was not available to answer mounting allegations about his past behaviour, the new recruit responded: “You’ll need to ask him that question.”
Challenged about if he thought Farage should apologise for the comments he is said to have made towards Jewish pupils, he stated: “That is a matter for him to deliberate on with his team.”
Defending the Leader
The peer maintained that the leader is “ethically suitable” to be the country's leader and rejected claims of dog-whistle politics. During his speech, Farage had doubled down on previous comments about pupils in Glasgow who speak English as a second language by posing the question to the crowd: “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”, Offord maintained that his new leader was “highlighting a factual issue that people are talking about on the doorstep”.
A Party on the Rise
The event, filled with an lively and passionate audience of predominantly older, white male backers who each paid £6 to attend, highlights Reform's increasing self-assurance before next May’s elections.
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. Following Scottish Labour's decline, Reform has regularly pushed it into third place lately, with support reaching over a fifth.
Declaring that party membership north of the border had quadrupled over the last twelve months to a running total of 12,000, the party chair, David Bull said he believed it could gain up to 20 MSPs in May, putting the party 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 told supporters to “man the barricades as we “challenge the ruling class”, warning that “the coming campaign will be difficult”.
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 underlined his delight at the party’s emergence as a force in the political scene in Scotland in the last year, confessing to supporters that he was once told he “couldn't fill a small venue”.
Local Context
Meanwhile, a few miles west in the heart of Falkirk, demonstrators with opposing views were gathering for a now-regular weekly standoff near a hotel used to accommodate asylum seekers.
A group coordinating protests said it was galvanised by a serious local crime. In an interview, Scotland's leader warned that the tactic of the far-right is to apportion the blame … to asylum seekers or migrants and I think that is the root of the poison”.
However, he differentiated between those who hold far-right views and people with “valid concerns” about pressure on local services or community safety.
