The Reform UK figurehead addressed the largest Reform UK rally held in Scotland to date, but avoided engaging with local journalists following the event. In his place, newly defected member of the House of Lords the former Conservative donor took on the task of field questions on claims of discriminatory behaviour and antisemitism linked to the party leader.
A High-Profile Defection
The leader presented the ex-Tory lord and millionaire donor during a packed event of about 700 attendees in a hotel venue in central Scotland. The businessman, who worked as a junior minister for Scotland in the previous administration and most recently served as the Scottish Tory party's chief financial officer, stated his plan to relinquish his seat in the Lords in order to become a candidate for the party in the upcoming Scottish parliament vote.
Farage said he was “delighted” to greet the new member. He called the peer’s defection as “a brave and historic act”.
Dodging the Press
The Reform leader spoke to the crowd after a turbulent week which saw him launch a fierce criticism of the broadcaster for questioning him about an investigation into claimed discriminatory and antisemitic behaviour as a youth. But, the leader avoided the expected press huddle after Saturday’s event.
When asked why Farage was not available to answer mounting allegations about his past behaviour, the new recruit responded: “That is a question for him to answer.”
Pressed on whether he believed an apology was necessary for his alleged remarks towards Jewish pupils, he stated: “I think that’s something he’ll need to consider with his own advisers.”
Insisting on Fitness
Offord insisted that the leader is “ethically suitable” to be prime minister and rejected claims of dog-whistle politics. During his speech, the leader had reiterated on his remarks about pupils in Glasgow who are not native English speakers by asking the rally: “Who authorised the complete transformation of Glasgow's demographics?”
While the first minister, John Swinney criticised the initial comments as “racist”, and the Labour leader labeled them “harmful and polarising”, the defector argued that Farage was “highlighting a factual issue that “voters are discussing”.
Growing Confidence
The event, attended by an lively and passionate audience of predominantly older, white male backers who each paid £6 to attend, highlights the party’s growing confidence ahead of the Scottish vote.
While the Scottish National Party remains ahead, Reform UK has made substantial progress in the past year, achieving a quarter of the vote in a recent parliamentary by-election. Following Scottish Labour's decline, the party has often relegated it to third lately, polling up to 22%.
Announcing that party membership north of the border had quadrupled in the past year to 12,000 members, 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” in the Scottish Parliament.
Fighting Talk
Thomas Kerr, a local representative for the party, elicited loud cheers as he described Farage as “the future PM of the UK”. He told supporters to “man the barricades as we take on the political establishment”, cautioning that “the coming campaign will be difficult”.
Although the party has yet to produce any Scotland-specific policies, representatives pledged Reform would “take on the green blob and the net-zero grifters”.
The leader personally underlined his delight at Reform's rise as a significant player in the political scene in Scotland over the past 12 months, admitting to the audience that he was once told he “couldn't fill a small venue”.
Protests Nearby
Meanwhile, a few miles west in Falkirk town centre, demonstrators with opposing views assembled for a now-regular weekly standoff near a hotel where asylum seekers are now housed.
A group coordinating protests stated they were motivated by a criminal case involving an asylum seeker. 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”.
However, he differentiated between those who hold far-right views and people with “valid concerns” about strain on public services or community safety.