Nigel Farage addressed the largest Reform UK rally so far in Scotland, but avoided engaging with local journalists afterwards. Instead, newly defected peer Malcolm Offord was left to responding to queries on claims of discriminatory behaviour and anti-Jewish sentiment surrounding Farage.
A High-Profile Defection
Farage introduced the ex-Tory lord and millionaire donor at a packed event of about 700 attendees at a hotel conference centre near Falkirk. Offord, who served as a Scotland Office minister under the last government and most recently served as treasurer of the Scottish Conservatives, announced his intention to relinquish his seat in the Lords 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 called the peer’s defection as “a brave and historic act”.
Avoiding Media Scrutiny
The Reform leader spoke to the crowd following a difficult period which saw him launch a tirade against the BBC for questioning him regarding a report into claimed discriminatory and remarks as a youth. But, the leader avoided the expected press huddle post-rally.
Questioned why Farage did not make himself available to address growing claims 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 his alleged remarks about Jewish students, Offord said: “I think that’s something he’ll need to consider with his own advisers.”
Defending the Leader
The peer maintained that the leader is “ethically suitable” to be prime minister and denied he was employing dog-whistle politics. While addressing supporters, Farage had doubled down on previous comments about pupils in Glasgow who are not native English speakers by posing the question to the crowd: “Who voted for the wholesale change of the population of Glasgow?”
While Scotland's First Minister criticised the initial comments as “racist”, and Keir Starmer called them “harmful and polarising”, Offord maintained that Farage was “highlighting a factual issue that “voters are discussing”.
Growing Confidence
The rally, attended by an energetic and enthused crowd of predominantly older, white male backers who each paid £6 to attend, showcases Reform's increasing self-assurance ahead of the Scottish vote.
Although the Scottish National Party remains ahead, the party 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 lately, with support reaching over a fifth.
Declaring that Reform UK membership in Scotland had increased fourfold in the past year to 12,000 members, the party chair, David Bull stated his belief it could gain up to 20 MSPs in May, putting the party in “a very strong position” in the Scottish Parliament.
Fighting Talk
Thomas Kerr, 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 told supporters to “man the barricades as we “challenge the ruling class”, warning that “the next five months will be tough”.
Despite not yet publishing any Scotland-specific policies, speakers from the north-east 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 Scottish politics in the last year, confessing to supporters that he was once told he “wouldn’t get 20 people in a room”.
Local Context
As the event was taking place, a few miles west in the heart of Falkirk, anti-immigration and anti-racist protesters assembled for what have become regular weekly confrontations near a hotel used to accommodate asylum seekers.
A group coordinating protests stated they were motivated by a criminal case involving an asylum seeker. Speaking previously, First Minister John Swinney warned 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”.
He also made a clear distinction extremist opinions and people with “valid concerns” about pressure on local services or community safety.
