Nigel Farage says he has forgiven Zia Yusuf for resignation
Businessman Mr Yusuf returned to the party over the weekend, just 48 hours after he quit his position, saying he had made an 'error'.
Speaking in Port Talbot on Monday, Mr Farage said: 'Let's be clear, I think Zia's done a great job.
'Under enormous pressure, and by the way, a level of abuse – racist abuse online – unlike I think anybody in modern politics has ever had to put up with.
'He made a mistake, he got it wrong. It plunged us for a few hours into a difficult place.
'He expressed his regret to me, I forgave him. I did say 'don't do it again', but I forgave him.'
Mr Farage went on to say that Mr Yusuf is coming back 'into a very very big job'.
'Would I rather those couple of days hadn't happened? Yes. But look how quickly and effectively we have dealt with it,' he added.
Mr Yusuf's departure followed an internal row, in which he described a question asked to the Prime Minister by the party's newest MP, Sarah Pochin, about banning the burka as 'dumb'.
Announcing his resignation on Thursday afternoon, he said: 'I no longer believe working to get a Reform government elected is a good use of my time, and hereby resign the office.'
Mr Yusuf said at the weekend that his decision to stand down had been due to 'exhaustion' after working for 11 months 'without a day off'.
He said he had been left feeling undervalued by some in the party and drained after being subjected to relentless racist abuse on X, and made the comments in 'error'.
'I spoke to Nigel and said I don't mind saying I made an error. It was a function of exhaustion,' he told the Sunday Times.
Asked about the row over talk of banning the burka, Mr Yusuf said he 'certainly did not resign because I have any strong views about the burka itself' but felt blindsided by Ms Pochin's question to Sir Keir Starmer.
Mr Farage told the same newspaper that Mr Yusuf will now effectively be doing 'four jobs' for the party, although his title is yet to be decided.
Mr Yusuf will lead Reform's plans to cut public spending – the so-called 'UK Doge', based on the US Department of Government Efficiency, which was led by tech billionaire Elon Musk.
The former chairman will also take part in policymaking, fundraising and media appearances.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
5 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Reform is on course to WIN next General Election, new poll shows - as Nigel Farage's party takes nine-point lead over Labour
Reform UK is now on course to win the next General Election, a shock new poll shows - as they take a stunning nine-point lead over Labour. The voting intention for Nigel Farage 's party's was more than double that of the Tories, who languished in third with 15 per cent, compared to Labour's 25 per cent and Reform's 34 per cent. An Ipsos opinion poll highlighted the rocketing success of the party and rising contempt for Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves ' chaotic first year in power. Replicated in a General Election, the figures would give Reform an overwhelming 400 seats in the Commons - with a majority of 200, The Telegraph reports. Figures show that 54 per cent of Labour voters and 48 per cent of Tory voters have changed their support - with a high proportion of defectors from both going to Reform. Farage would become Prime Minister and there would be just 10 Conservative seats, while Labour would be reduced from 403 to 140. 'This poll shows Reform can and will win the next general election,' Farage told the broadsheet. Figures from the polling of 1,180 Brits show Labour's plunging popularity, after winning the 2024 General Election with the biggest majority since Tony Blair. But figures now show him to be the least popular prime minister at this stage of his time in office since records began. Just 19 per cent say they are satisified with the work he is doing - while 73 per cent are dissatisfied. In comparison, after the same amount of time Boris Johnson had an approval raiting of 48 per cent, Blair's was 68 per cent and John Major's was 54 per cent. The Conservatives' polling is also the worst since records began, with only 11 per cent of voters satisfied with Kemi Badenoch's work. Gideon Skinner, senior director of UK politics at Ipsos, told The Telegraph: 'Reform UK has continued to build on its success, helped by high levels of enthusiasm among its own support and among working-class voters in particular, and taking votes from both Labour and especially the Conservatives, who show little sign of recovery. 'The disappointment with Labour is clear, even among those who voted for the party in 2024.' It comes after the public swing of support tp Reform was dramatically shown in the local elections, scoring victory in a Runcorn by-election on the same night. In a night of jaw-dropping results, Reform UK claimed outright majorities in Staffordshire and Lincolnshire County Councils, toppling long-standing Conservative dominance.
Daily Mail
6 hours ago
- Daily Mail
EXCLUSIVE Proof UK cares more about asylum seekers than its own citizens? Shock figures show councils are housing up to 10 times more asylum seekers than homeless people
Seventeen councils are accommodating up to 10 times more asylum seekers than homeless people, analysis suggests. The biggest disparity was seemingly in Pendle, a borough inside Reform's newly-gained Lancashire authority. Latest Government data shows 453 asylum seekers are being housed in Pendle. In contrast, only nine homeless households are in temporary accommodation. Critics of Britain's immigration policy have seized upon the figures as proof we are ran by people who 'care more about illegal migrants than its own citizens'. However, officials criticised MailOnline's 'misleading' analysis and argued that they could not control where homeless people choose to live. The full results of our investigation can be viewed in our interactive map, which lays bare the true situation in every council. Home Office data shows 89,000 asylum seekers – the equivalent of a town the size of Stevenage, Hastings or Southport – were being housed across England as of the end of March. By comparison, 128,000 homeless 'households' were in temporary accommodation heading into 2025. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government, which keeps track of the number of homeless 'households', says their overall estimate equates to around 295,000 people. Because it does not list specific figures for each council, the only way of comparing the two is by posting homeless households against the number of asylum seekers. Ten councils did not publish figures on homeless households, meaning they were excluded from our analysis. In total, more than a third of England's councils currently house asylum seekers at double the rate of homeless households. Behind Pendle came Stockton-on-Tees (797 asylum seekers vs 26 homeless households) and Wyre (375 asylum seekers vs 14 homeless households). Robert Bates, of the Centre for Migration Control thinktank, said: 'Those who were born here and have contributed to the economy have been abandoned, and left on the streets, in favour of undocumented young men towards whom we should have no moral or legal obligation. 'Thousands of British veterans and families are facing real hardship but are denied even a fraction of the generosity extended to asylum seekers. 'Scattering these people across the country places further strain on communities suffering with a dysfunctional housing market, increasing rents and making it harder for young people to own a home. What is an asylum seeker? Asylum is protection given by a country to someone fleeing from persecution in their own country. An asylum seeker is someone who has applied for asylum and is awaiting a decision on whether they will be granted refugee status. An asylum applicant who does not qualify for refugee status may still be granted leave to remain in the UK for humanitarian or other reasons. An asylum seeker whose application is refused at initial decision may appeal the decision through an appeal process and, if successful, may be granted leave to remain. 'Anyone entering the country illegally should be detained and swiftly deported - it is only then that we can hope this madness will end.' While an asylum seeker is waiting to hear the outcome of their claim, the Home Office is legally obligated to provide them housing if they need it. If they are successful they become recognised as refugees – entitled to work and receive full state benefits. From that point on, councils have statutory responsibility to look after housing, if the refugees are unable to. But councils do not provide accommodation to everyone and instead use a priority system, which takes into account children and other vulnerability factors, to decide who gets a home. It means that some refugees may also fall under the homeless category in official statistics. Fuelled by an explosion in small boat crossings, the cost of accommodating asylum seekers has tripled to £4.2million a day. Around 30,000 are currently kept in hotels, where they are usually provided meals along with £8.86 per week. The Chancellor Rachel Reeves promised last week to end the housing of asylum seekers in hotels over the next four years. The handout amount rises to £49.18 per week if no meals are provided. Extra money is also provided to pregnant mothers and young children. As well as getting free accommodation, asylum seekers are also entitled to taxpayer-funded NHS healthcare, prescriptions, dental care and children under 18 are required to go to school, where they may be able to get free meals. Homeless people in temporary accommodation are offered full state benefits such as Universal Credit, and some hostels provide food that is paid through a service charge. Those living in temporary accommodation make up the vast majority of homeless people, with only around 3,900 sleeping rough on any given night, according to the charity Shelter. Critics claim that many homeless people have paid council tax and contributed for years to British tax and society, unlike asylum seekers. Around four in five of those assessed as needing homeless relief of some kind were British nationals, according to the latest data. Some of those left out in the cold are even veterans and ex-service personnel who have fought for the country in Iraq and Afghanistan. Concerns have been raised that they may have to make do with a concrete pillow in a shop doorway, while they look up to see asylum seekers getting a cosy hotel bed on the same street. Life on the streets is often dangerous, with rates of drinking and drug abuse high, leading to high rates of poor mental health and death compared to those who have a bed. Alp Mehmet, of Migration Watch UK, said: 'Over 100,000 people applied for asylum in 2024, including main applicants and their dependants. There will be just as many seeking asylum this year. 'If they're not in hotels, they will have to be housed elsewhere. 'Then there's the 430,000 net migration added to the population last year. 'Well over half a half a million people needing a roof over their heads, roofs that won't be available to British citizens. 'When will the Government see sense and end this madness? Get a grip, Sir Keir!' The public has been expressing their discontentment with the apparent unfairness of the situation for some time. A recent survey by IPSOS found 68 per cent of the public deem the numbers coming to the UK to seek refugee status or asylum too high. And in March when MailOnline visited Coventry, the local authority with the fifth-highest number of supported asylum seekers in Britain, locals expressed their frustration with the process. Louse and Dee said they were living in temporary accommodation and claimed the increasing numbers of asylum seekers in the area was making the housing shortage worse. Louise, 37, said: 'I'm currently homeless. The houses go to the asylum seekers rather than the actual homeless. 'I'm in a shared accommodation and I am technically homeless. 'I think the Government should be looking after their own before helping other people. 'I don't think the city can handle the amount of people coming in.' Dee, 38, said she had to live separately from her husband just to find a bed to sleep in and blasted the Government. 'I think it's ridiculous that asylum seekers can come over here and get housed but my husband, who has paid taxes his whole life, is on the street. 'I'm homeless too, we've had to separate so that one of us can get somewhere to sleep. 'I don't think we can handle the numbers, we can't house the people who are from this city. 'If they come over here and work and pay into the system, fair play to them. I know diverse people who I call my family. But the fact is, we need to help our own.' In Manchester in November 2024, protesters against asylum seekers being housed locally held up signs which said 'House Our Homeless First'. There have been some recent cases of local authorities block-booking entire hotels for homeless people, in the same way the Home Office does for asylum seekers. Last year Milton Keynes council signed a deal to use all 140 rooms of Harben House Hotel for five years, which it will use to house homeless people. A report in August revealed that the council was spending around £20m a year on temporary accommodation mainly in the private rented sector and it needed to find lower cost spaces. In the battle for scarce accommodation, councils have lost out on renting hotels due to Home Office contractors seeking space for asylum seekers outbidding them. Furthermore, many asylum seekers become homeless once they are granted refugee status and have to find their own accommodation. They are given 56 days to move on from asylum accommodation following the issue of their decision, which was extended from 28 days in December, but some campaigners complain it is still not enough time. The No Accommodation Network (Naccom), an umbrella organisation for 140 frontline groups working with asylum seekers, refugees and other migrants across the UK, said homelessness among refugees has doubled in the last year. In data shared with the Guardian in November, it said 1,941 refugees had now found themselves without accommodation – the highest number they had ever dealt with. A Government spokesperson said: 'This analysis is incorrect and misleading as it compares the number of individual asylum seekers with homeless households, which can contain more than one person. 'We've taken immediate action to fix the broken asylum system this Government inherited, by increasing asylum decision making by 52 per cent and removing 30,000 people with no right to be here. We have already made asylum savings of half a billion. 'We are also taking urgent and decisive action to end homelessness, fix the foundations of local Government and drive forward our Plan for Change by providing £1bn for crucial homelessness services this year so councils can support families faster.'
Spectator
8 hours ago
- Spectator
Tories will remember this assisted dying vote
'I judge a man by one thing, which side would he have liked his ancestors to fight on at Marston Moor?' So said Isaac Foot, the Liberal MP and father of Michael. For some Tories, both in and out of parliament, Friday's assisted dying debate will carry a similar weight in judgements of character. Some 80 per cent of Tory MPs voted against Kim Leadbeater's Bill at Third Reading, with 92 against, 20 in favour and five registered abstentions. Of the 25-strong new intake, elected last year, just four backed Leadbeater's Bill: Aphra Brandreth, Peter Bedford, Ashley Fox and Neil Shastri-Hurst. Social conservatives note that the Tories were much more aligned on assisted dying than Reform, which split by three votes against to two in favour. Only six MPs backed both this measure and Tuesday's abortion liberalisation vote: Brandreth, Shastri-Hurst, Luke Evans, Kit Malthouse, Andrew Mitchell and Laura Trott. A striking number of senior Tories were among the 20 who supported assisted dying including Rishi Sunak, Oliver Dowden and Jeremy Hunt. Six shadow cabinet members backed it too including Mel Stride, Victoria Atkins and Chris Philp. 'That's the end of his leadership hopes', remarks one opponent. Among those who opposed assisted dying, there is praise for Kemi Badenoch. The Tory leader had previously supported the concept in principle before coming out strongly against Leadbeater's Bill in November. Her argument centred on the legislative process: that insufficient time was dedicated to the Bill and that MPs ought to serve as scrutineers, not campaigners. Her robust stance since then has impressed begrudging internal critics. 'She did do a good job', admits one MP who backed a rival candidate. Friday's vote showed Badenoch's thinking to be firmly in-line with the majority of her own MPs on this issue. There is frustration among some of her supporters that if twelve Tory proponents had changed their mind, Leadbeater's Bill would have been sunk. Perhaps, in time, assisted dying will become accepted wisdom in Tory circles. Those in favour cite its public support and point to the party's history of belatedly backing 'progressive' measures. In March 2003, it was a minority of modernisers who disregarded Iain Duncan Smith to back scrapping Section 28. Within five years, one of them, Boris Johnson, was standing for Mayor of London. Within ten, a Tory PM was championing same-sex marriage. But for those still reeling and angry from yesterday's vote, it certainly doesn't feel that way today.
