Nigel Farage is on the brink of another election breakthrough… but then what?
Probably the worst thing that could happen to Nigel Farage this week would be that Reform UK wins all the six regional mayoralties and 37 local and county councils that are up for grabs in Thursday's elections.
It would force his policy-free populist party of protest into a party of power – and would show this bunch of 'fruitcakes, loonies and closet racists', as someone once called them, to be clueless as they actually are. They don't have a clue about how to help the people who vote for them – often as not as a fairly desperate protest – and they need to be exposed as the charlatans they really are.
That won't happen – but Reform will do well, if the polls are to be believed.
The local elections are helpful to them because they can concentrate their still-modest resources on key wards, in a way they can't so easily in larger, parliamentary constituencies. Such is the fragmentation of voting now that some of their candidates could be in charge of entire cities and counties, on little more than a quarter of possible votes cast, taking into account the traditionally low turnouts – not much more than one in seven of the adult residents in the area.
The first-past-the-post system, which the Tories brought in for the mayoralties, may not do them any favours. Andrea Jenkyns in Lincolnshire and Luke Campbell in Hull and East Yorkshire look to have the best shouts, with Arron Banks having an outside chance of coming through the middle of a split progressive vote in the West of England. They might get into some kind of power-sharing arrangement with the Tories in the counties, too – but Doncaster is Reform's best bet to overturn Labour control.
And then what?
Reform has no local election manifesto, and the mayors and councillors can't do anything to 'stop the boats' or reduce regular migration. Farage says that they'll set up Elon Musk-inspired 'Doge' operations that will cut waste and, no doubt, sack anyone connected with diversity, equality and inclusivity in local government. Which won't save much money and will, though the Reform politicians won't care, make local authorities less open and accessible to minorities of all kinds, not just ethnic groups.
They'll try and get rid of programmes without knowing what they are, Musk-style, and cause enormous damage in doing so – not least to themselves, because no one is voting Reform UK to make their local services even worse than they currently are.
Do Farage's ignorant remarks about people with mental health problems and children with special educational needs being 'over-diagnosed' mean they'll try to cut them off – despire a statutory obligation to care for them? And a series of expensive court challenges? One must fear the worst.
Will, in other words, Reform UK be able to balance the books and run services miraculously better than their Labour, Liberal Democrat, Conservative and Green counterparts? Of course not.
The central fact about British local government is that it is skint and being asked to do much with too little by central government – and, as a result, is utterly demoralised. The Reform politicians – and, by definition, they are politicians, not outsiders – now seeking power don't have access to secret funding to transform social care, to save libraries, to house people, reduce council debts or revitalise town centres. But nor is there any sign that they have the experience, ideas and policies to make what little money there is go that much further.
If they're sensible – which tends not to be the case – the Reform lot will just get on with the job and stick to the local agenda. If they run rather closer to the form book, they'll spend their time and energy on stirring up trouble, running campaigns against 'migrant hotels', dividing relatively harmonious populations, creating grievances where there aren't any handy ones to exploit, and making dangerous fools of themselves.
Contrary to what some Conservatives, such as Robert Jenrick and Ben Houchem would like, the worst thing the Tories could do is to usher Reform into power anywhere, because from that, there is only going to be a downside – financial and administrative chaos, shameful cruelty to the homeless and people with disabilities, and a large dollop of ill-concealed racial hatred, especially Islamophobia, propagated in the name of 'free speech'. No self-respecting Conservative should be associated with that, no matter what the balance of power in the council chamber is. Reform should be quarantined, not facilitated.
Reform rule will solve nothing.
If they get in – and no less an authority as Professor John Curtice told the Independent that Reform had 'already won' the Thursday elections, and will end up winning 'probably a few hundred' seats across the country – Reform politicians will bring themselves and, sadly, their communities into disrepute, and then, if we're lucky, split on the question of which residents in their area that they'd like to 'deport'.
What, for those purposes, is an 'illegal immigrant'? Does it include people born here? Does it include refugees who've been allowed to settle? To become British citizens? Do these new councillors and mayors agree with Reform's former MP Rupert Lowe about deporting relatives of those involved in the rape gangs? Do they think incitement to riot or racial hatred should be legalised?
Do they think the NHS should be turned into a safety net for people who can't afford private treatment or health insurance? How will they afford to take everyone on less than £20,000 out of income tax? Do they want Britain to do what Donald Trump wants? Betray Ukraine to Putin? More Brexit?
Reform UK talks a lot about 'Broken Britain'. Well, we might ask ourselves what broke Britain. The answer isn't 'illegal' migration – the numbers are too small – or even the much larger flows of people entering on perfectly legitimate work and student visas, keeping the economy going. What has really broken Britain is Brexit, because it permanently depresses investment and economic growth. It has thus reduced wages and the taxes needed to pay for good public services, including local government.
Farage broke Britain – and now tells us he knows how to fix it. Maybe we should just remind ourselves about what happened the last time Farage and his followers said they had all the answers.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Rhyl Journal
5 minutes ago
- Rhyl Journal
British father-to-be feels like ‘second class citizen' over family visa rules
David Todd, 33, is calling on the Government to reform the policy, including to scrap or lower the minimum income requirement (MIR) for British citizens to bring their partners to the country, as ministers mull over updating the visa route. His plea comes as charities Reunite Families UK and Coram published reports on Monday documenting the 'significant emotional and psychological harm' to families from the policy, particularly for children who grow up under long separation from one of their parents. Mr Todd had hoped to move back to the UK from Germany with his American wife, Claire Todd, 32, before the birth of their first baby which is due in October. But the couple are facing being split up for Mr Todd to return to the UK alone to build up enough income proof as the British citizen in the relationship, or raise savings of more than £88,500 dictated by the visa rules to allow them to return as a family. Mr Todd told the PA news agency: 'There's been lots of times where I've stayed awake at night worrying about it and how it's all going to work out, because you feel completely helpless. 'It's like we're second class citizens because we married someone who fell in love with someone who wasn't British.' Earlier this month the Migration Advisory Committee (MAC) set out its recommendations after a review requested by the Home Secretary to look at how to set an MIR for family visas that balances economic wellbeing and family life. It warned against raising the threshold for family visas to the same level for skilled workers, as planned by the previous government. Skilled workers are only eligible to come to the UK if they earn a salary of £38,700 or more, compared to £29,000 required mainly for family visas. The UK's current £29,000 threshold, which was set in 2024, is high compared to other high-income countries reviewed by the MAC. It was previously set at £18,600 since 2012. Mr Todd, from Solihull, West Midlands, added increasing the level to £38,700 would be 'devastating'. 'Even with this MAC report now, we don't know what the Government's going to do, how they're going to react,' the classical music conductor said. 'It's this feeling that you're kind of helpless, you're stuck in limbo, and you're desperately trying to contort yourself into this position where you can make it work just because you want to live with your wife or husband.' The couple, living in Wurzburg, Germany, first left the UK after Ms Todd's student visa ended and moved to the European nation so they could be together seven years ago. After building 'good careers' as classical musicians on the continent, the couple began trying to make a return to the UK up to a year ago, wanting to be near family as they start their own. For Mr Todd, he said the Government should at least make the ways to prove income easier, and to include the spouse's salary to contribute to the income threshold. He said it is 'ridiculous' his wife's income cannot be used to meet the salary requirement despite her remote job as a content creator paying enough to mean they 'could move to the UK tomorrow'. Mr Todd said he wants to 'avoid at all costs' the prospect of being separated from his wife and child, adding: 'It just feels wrong, am I going to have to turn to my child when she's older and say to her: 'Well, sorry, the reason I wasn't with you for the first year of your life was because I was trying to get work for the family to move.'' British father Ed Moon, currently living in Taipei with his Taiwanese wife Amber Moon and four-year-old daughter Maya, is also applying to the family visa route to move back to the UK as Maya reaches school age. He told PA the most difficult thing is the 'extremely extensive' documentation you need to provide with any errors meaning the visa is denied and the process must be started again, with visa fees costing around £2,000. 'We're having to dip into every ounce of our savings to do this,' the 36-year-old from High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire, said. 'You feel just unwanted by your country essentially. It's been especially tough, really like from a personal perspective.' The journalist also said it is a waste of money for the taxpayer for him to grow up and be educated in the UK, to then not let him and his family live there, adding: 'I want to be able to contribute to the UK.' The research by Reunite Families and Coram found that British citizens face exile, increased financial pressure and separation from their partners often for long periods of time from the family visa policy. For children separated from one of their parents, the charities warned they can face life-changing trauma and distress. The report also highlighted how the rules particularly discriminate against those including British mothers, who are more likely to experience hardship, working class and low income partners and black and ethnic minority workers, who are more likely to earn less than their white counterparts. Reunite Families UK executive director Caroline Coombs said 'simple and practical changes' from the Home Office could make significant differences to families, starting with scrapping the MIR and simplifying the rules and application process to stop the need for expensive legal advice. 'These rules have become the tax on love. People are suffering and want to be heard.' A Home Office spokesperson said: 'We understand the minimum income requirement for family visas needs to balance a respect for family life while also maintaining the UK's economic stability, which is why the Home Secretary commissioned the independent Migration Advisory Committee to undertake a review. 'We are now considering its findings and will respond in due course.'
The National
an hour ago
- The National
The proscription of Palestine Action has frightening implications
The legal proscription of groups such as Palestine Action is founded upon Islamophobic counter-terror legislation, which has disproportionately targeted Muslims and securitised issues related to the Middle East. It risks criminalising not only membership of an effective activist group but also a host of pro-Palestinian statements and actions. Home Secretary Yvette Cooper is expected to announce the ban today after Palestine Action members broke into RAF Brize Norton in Oxfordshire last week and sprayed two military planes with red paint. Proscribing Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation sets a dangerous precedent against anti-war activism but also represents the suppression by successive UK governments of activism drawing attention to British support for Israeli war crimes in Palestine, Lebanon, Syria, Yemen and Iran. READ MORE: 'He should be in the Hague': Laura Kuenssberg slammed for Israeli president interview One reason why Palestine Action is facing such a harsh reprisal is the clear embarrassment the Brize Norton event has caused the British Government. By breaking into an RAF air base, Palestine Action has sharply highlighted the limits of British power and security, at a time where Keir Starmer's Government seems keen to impress a reactionary US administration and show support for Israeli aggression in Iran. Meanwhile, the tactics of Palestine Action,have proven to be highly effective. Targeting institutions complicit in the genocide of Palestinians – such as Israeli-based military contractor Elbit Systems UK – it has used highly visual forms of direct activism to great effect, with occupations, the scaling of public structures and the spray painting and daubing of buildings. Such activism has both disrupted the British military and British-based businesses profiting from war and genocide, and tapped into a widespread sense of disapproval and disgust across the public at UK Government for Israel, a country which has carried out mass killings. The use of counter-terrorism powers against Palestine Action may seem surprising, but it represents a long process by which successive UK governments have sought to clamp down on activism highlighting British hypocrisy on the international stage. For many years, counter-terror police have been conducting intelligence gathering on climate activists, to see if their activity could 'indicate a path towards terrorism'. Extinction Rebellion and Just Stop Oil have regularly faced harassment and threats of counter-terror action. The proscribing of Palestine Action not only forms part of an assault on activism, but also showcases how counter-terrorism has become increasingly anti-Palestinian in its orientation, with British authorities deliberately and systematically conflating support for Palestine with terrorism. Academics and human rights groups, such as Amnesty International, have long detailed experiences of harassment by counter-terror police, based on actual or perceived support of Palestinian rights. The UK Government Prevent programme has played a significant part in securitising Palestinian activism, with schools students as young as five being reported to authorities after expressing sentiments in support of Palestine. Since the start of massive Israeli violence in Gaza in October 2023, such reports have skyrocketed by 455%, with students told to remove badges, stickers and T-shirts that have 'free Palestine' on them, alleged retaliatory measures against college students for tweeting support or joining pickets for Palestine; and reports of university exclusions, suspensions and investigations, as well as the cancellations of pro-Palestinian events. This normalisation of targeting of pro-Palestinian activism has had severe legal impacts, leading to prosecutions based on anti-activist sentiment. These include the prosecution of three women who displayed images of paragliders during a protest and a man for wearing a green Saudi Arabian headband containing the basic statement of the Islamic faith 'shahada', on the charge of 'carrying or displaying an article in a public place in such a way as to arouse reasonable suspicion' that they were supporting Hamas. In addition to the long trend by successive UK governments of criminalising Palestinian activism, proscription now frames it as a terror threat – equating Palestinian activism with, for instance, the 2005 London bombings, the murder of 51 Muslims in Christchurch, New Zealand, or the execution of 77 left-wing youth at Utøya, Norway. The use of such powers has frightening implications for Palestinian activism, not just because it will be framed as a security threat to the British state, but also because of how such legislation is constructed. The Act of Proscription, as detailed under Part II of the Terrorism Act 2000, not only makes it illegal to be a member of a banned group, but also criminalises a host of other actions that are, or can be perceived as, being linked to the aims or objectives of the group. It is not just a terror offence to belong, or profess to belong to, a proscribed organisation, in the UK or overseas – it is a terror offence to engage in acts that may be considered as supportive. Under Part II, Section 12 of the Act, supportive acts are defined as 'moral support or approval' of a proscribed organisation, expressing an opinion or belief supportive of a proscribed organisation, or encouraging support for the activities of such an organisation. The implementation of this law, when used against a non-violent Palestinian activist group, is the criminalisation of anyone who publicly expresses sentiment in support of Palestine Action's aims. Its website lists these as 'ending global participation in Israel's genocidal and apartheid regime' and seeking to 'make it impossible for … companies to profit from the oppression of Palestinians' Proscription also criminalises the wearing of clothing or carrying of signs that may 'arouse reasonable suspicion' that an individual supports a proscribed organisation, under Section 13 of the Act. This includes publishing images of such items online. Pro-Palestinian clothes, the Palestinian keffiyeh, Palestinian flags and signs are now very squarely in the crosshairs of counter-terror police, creating a vast array of possibility for prosecution of activists. The proscription of Palestine Action places people in Scotland and across Britain in very dangerous legal territory. Heavy-handed measures are increasingly being deployed by the British state to prosecute non-violent groups and activists as 'terrorists'. Successive UK governments have sought to roll back human and democratic rights under the guise of counter-terrorism, prevent activism critical of the British state, and to conflate Muslim communities and Middle Eastern issues with terrorism. The banning of Palestine Action represents an attempt to crush dissent that highlights British complicity in war crimes and embarrasses the UK Government. It also introduces a host of deeply worrying possibilities for the prosecution of activists, journalists, academics – indeed, anyone who speaks out in support of Palestinian rights, an end to the genocide and the use of public activism. Proscription shows the contempt the UK Government has for Palestinian freedom, and should be a loud alarm for those who value democracy and human rights, in times of genocide. Richard McNeil-Willson lectures in the Islamic and Middle Eastern studies department at the University of Edinburgh
Daily Record
an hour ago
- Daily Record
The SNP has descended into civil war since the Hamilton by-election
In just four weeks, the political landscape in Scotland has shifted dramatically. This time last month, John Swinney was boasting about how well things were going for him and the SNP. 'I have healed the SNP' is what he told the people of Scotland as he talked up the SNP's chances of winning the coming Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election. He claimed Reform was the only threat to the SNP. But don't worry, full-on John was going to see them off. A month later, and the reality could not be more different. The people of Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse chose a new direction with Scottish Labour – not managed decline with John Swinney. And his party – far from being healed – has descended into full-on civil war as rebels challenge John Swinney's tired and incompetent leadership. Pride comes before a fall – and John Swinney has fallen head-first into a crisis that may cost him his job. The fact is that Scots are sick and tired of SNP incompetence and failure. The people of our country know that John Swinney and his divided party are tired and out of ideas. All they offer is more failure. Take the issue of Alexander Dennis bus manufacturers. The business is set to scrap hundreds of jobs and move to England due to lack of business. But what does the SNP do? Support this Scottish business? No – it buys buses from China, leaves Scottish workers high and dry, and then tells porkies to cover up their incompetence. You don't have to oppose the SNP to see that they are a busted flush and that John Swinney is a disastrous First Minister. Even his own MSPs are rebelling. One said John Swinney has 'no energy, no fire, no boldness, no vision.' And they are right. It's no wonder one rebel MSP said John Swinney had two weeks to come up with a big idea to save his job. But what have we had? More trademark Swinney waffle. One in six Scots are on an NHS waiting list. But what's John Swinney's big plan? An app that was promised years ago and the merging of just two health quangos. Our schools are facing a behaviour crisis with teachers and pupils fearing to go to work and school. John Swinney's big plan? Laminate bullet points and stick them on the wall. We are in the midst of a housing crisis, when housing is devolved to the SNP government. John Swinney's plan? Write a letter to the Deputy Prime Minister. And when all else failed, hit the panic button and start talking about independence again. You couldn't make it up. The staggering incompetence of the SNP would be funny if working Scots weren't paying the price day in and day out. It's time to choose a new direction. To turn our backs on John Swinney and the old, failed politics of the past. And to choose a better Scotland with better leadership. New thinking, new energy and a new direction for our country. That's what I offer – join me on that journey. Nuclear power The global race towards clean power is on – and I firmly believe Scotland should be at the forefront of it. Investing in clean power will not only deliver lower bills, but will create quality jobs and strengthen our energy security so we are no longer subject to the whims of tyrants like Putin. Renewables are a large part of this, and the Labour government is driving forward investment in Scottish renewables through its publicly-owned energy company, GB Energy. But we can't limit our ambitions for Scotland's energy future. Clean nuclear power can work alongside renewables to cut emissions and deliver our climate goals – and it can bring billions of pounds of investment, thousands of high-quality jobs, and greater energy security for Scotland. Communities elsewhere in the UK are set to reap the benefits of nuclear power, but the SNP is stopping Scotland from doing the same. John Swinney could unlock this investment with the stroke of a pen by lifting his party's ideological ban on nuclear power – but he refuses. The SNP is actively blocking jobs and investment in our communities – whatever happened to stronger for Scotland? A Scottish Labour government would ditch the SNP's damaging ban and finally get Scotland the investment and energy security we deserve. Alexander Dennis In Manchester, buses from Alexander Dennis have been bought to make up the core of their publicly-owned Bee Network. But despite warnings from the company, the SNP has failed to maximise its support or use the law to help them buy busses domestically. I'll learn that lesson A Scottish Labour will put Scottish workers and businesses first.
