Reform continues to make the headlines for all the wrong reasons after its party leader in Wales announced he was stepping down following his arrest on suspicion of assault.
Dan Thomas, who became Reform UK Wales leader in February this year, was arrested on suspicion of assault and controlling or coercive behaviour. He was released without charge.
Thomas said in a statement: ““It has been the honour of my life to have been the leader of Reform Wales and see this party go from zero to 34 elected members and become the largest opposition group in Welsh history.
“With deep regret, I am now standing down from this position due to personal reasons.
“Over the weekend, I was reported to the police and was released without charge.
“I stress that I have done nothing wrong, but I do not want the coming headlines to be a distraction from the fantastic work our Senedd team is doing in holding this government to account.”
Gwent Police said: “On Sunday 13 September a 45-year-old man, from the Aberbargoed area, was arrested on suspicion of assault and engaging in controlling/coercive behaviour.
Reform continues to be exposed for having links with far-right thugs and groups, after an investigation revealed that a Facebook group involved in the recent far right anti migration protests which saw balaclava clad men block roads and cause disruption, was set up by a Reform activist.
Earlier this month, hundreds of men wearing all black and balaclavas took part in two anti-migrant protests in Dover and Portsmouth. In Dover they blocked the town’s two main roads for several hours and in Portsmouth they blocked migrant coaches.
Ministers condemned the “thuggish and intimidating behaviour” of far-right activists who blocked roads, and who were coordinated by Danny Thomas, a close associate of anti-migrant and anti-Muslim activist Tommy Robinson.
While Reform leader Nigel Farage issued condemnation of the far-right protesters, saying it was ‘disgusting’ and that nobody, ‘whether they’re on the left or right, should be wearing balaclavas’, it seems not everyone in Reform shares his sentiments with some keen to support Thomas’ far-right thugs.
HOPE not hate has discovered that the North East Patriot Platform and Tyneside Patriots Facebook pages, part of the Patriot Platform network that launched the intimidating masked vigilante actions in Dover and Portsmouth last week, have been set up by Mark Thorn, a Reform activist from Gateshead.
The anti-extremist group added: “Thorn describes himself as the “Reform UK Representative/Campaigner” for Gateshead Central & Whickham Constituency on his social media accounts, which contain a mix of pro-Reform and pro-Patriot Platform content, and appears to believe that the party’s criticisms of the movement are not sincere.
“Responding to criticism of Farage’s response from another member, Thorn argued that Farage public stance was guided by political necessity and might not match his “secretly and privately personal opinions”:
In the same Facebook group, five Reform councillors indicated that they were keen to support Patriot Platform’s activities. They included Cllr Trevor Shonk of Kent County Council, Cllrs Sandra Pickering and James Wright of Gateshead Council and Cllrs Paul Goldingay and Jamie Campbell of Solihull Council.
Reform UK has been plaugued by yet another crisis at its flagship local authority after three more councillors quit.
The three councillors quit Durham Council for a number of reasons, bringing Reform’s majority on the local authority down from 65 to 51.
Durham council was supposed to be one of Reform’s flagship local authorities, showing how the party would govern if elected in national office and yet far from being a success, it has been plagued by bitter infighting and defections.
One of the councillors who has quit, Lyndsey Fox, said: “I’ve been thinking of resigning for some time, and the reason is because I reported a very serious safeguarding issue on July 14, and we’re now two months on and I’ve heard nothing.”
Reform’s record in local government has been defined by bitter infighting, broken promises and incompetence.
Self-proclaimed ‘man of the people’ Nigel Farage has said that he will seek to stop trade unions giving money to the Labour Party.
Scandal hit Farage has said that he is willing to take drastic measures if the goverment forces Reform to hand back £72 million it has received from two crypto billionaires.
Christopher Harborne and Ben Delo donated £36m each to the party in the space of just 24 hours at the weekend. Questions have been raised over whether the donations are legal and if they would have to be returned.
Even before the current donations to Reform, the government was already looking at tightening the rules following the Rycroft Review into foreign financial influence. The government then said it would introduce a £100,000 annual cap on donations from overseas electors.
And the rules go further than simply stopping somebody living abroad from writing an enormous cheque. They would also continue to restrict some people who return to Britain, until they have been resident here for a full calendar year.
Crucially, the government intends the new limit to apply retrospectively to donations made since 25 March this year. Donations caught by the new rules and above the limit could therefore eventually have to be returned.
A panicked Farage, who claims to represent working people, has threatened to stop unions giving cash to the Labour Party in retaliation.
Writing in the Telegraph, Farage said he would look to retaliate by ending the unions’ historic funding of the Labour Party if he becomes prime minister.
He said: “The Unite union alone has given the Labour party over £50m over the course of the last few years. They’ve got the Employment Rights Act, not to mention big pay rises for bus drivers. If anybody is giving money to do political bidding, it’s the trade unions.
“So I would just warn the Labour party here and now: If you try and ban our donors, we in government would certainly ban funding from the trade unions. I don’t want to go down that route. But it’s something we would be prepared to do.”
Business secretary Jonathan Reynolds hit back telling HuffPost that trade union donations are different to those from billionaires.
He said: “When we talk about union donations, that is not one entity. That is tens of thousands of ordinary people choosing to make that donation, and it’s banded up and given from the union. But it’s very easy to opt out of that.
It’s going from bad to worse for Nigel Farage, after a new poll found that his popularity has fallen to its lowest level ever.
The poll, carried out by YouGov, found that 69% of Britons now have an unfavourable opinion of Nigel Farage, the highest recorded by the pollster in the decade it has been tracking Farage’s popularity.
Barely a quarter of voters (24%) have a favourable view of the Reform chief, giving him a net favourability rating of minus 45.
By contrast, 46% of people have a favourable view of Labour leader and prime minister Andy Burnham. It comes after Burnham promised bold and radical measures on the cost of living crisis.
Farage meanwhile has lurched from one scandal to the next, and faces a Standards Committee probe into his failure to declare a personal £5 million “gift” he received from crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne shortly before becoming an MP in 2024.
While Reform may be very gleeful right now over the £72million in donations they have secured from two crypto billionaires, it turns out that they could face an investigation from the elections watchdog over the cash given to them.
HuffPost UK reports that Labour MP Phil Brickell has asked the Electoral Commission to clarify whether Ben Delo and Christopher Harborne’s donations are permissible. Harborne and Delo donated £36m each to the party in the space of just 24 hours at the weekend. Questions have been raised over whether the donations are legal and if they would have to be returned.
Even before the current donations to Reform, the government was already looking at tightening the rules following the Rycroft Review into foreign financial influence. The government then said it would introduce a £100,000 annual cap on donations from overseas electors.
Delo has moved back to the UK from Hong Kong, while Harborne is now registered to vote in Hampshire, although it is unclear whether he still lives in Thailand.
Now it turns out that the Electoral Commission could investigate Reform over the donations too after Labour MP Phil Brickell wrote to them.
The HuffPost reports: “Brickell, who is chair of the all-party parliamentary group on anti-corruption, said: “The British public deserve complete confidence that all political donations are lawful, transparent and come with no strings attached.”
In a letter to Electoral Commission chief executive Dr Vijay Rangarajan, seen by HuffPost UK, Brickell says “it appears very likely that both donors were still registered overseas on – and for some time after – March 25, 2026”.
He added: “I would therefore be very grateful for swift clarification from the Electoral Commission on whether you see grounds for opening an investigation into the permissibility of the two £36m donations.”
“The first reaction is horror,” is how the left-liberal Der Spiegel described the shocking victory of the Alternative for Germany (AfD) in the recent local elections.
The newspaper pointed to the historical significance of a party that does not draw a clear dividing line from Nazi Germany winning an election by such a large margin more than 80 years after the Nazi dictatorship.
Would Der Spiegel be able to make such a critical assessment if the AfD were in government and had the power to change the law?
The far-right party has long targeted Germany’s established media by undermining its credibility, threatening its funding and becoming a social media superpower to bypass traditional journalists entirely.
“We want to finally pull the plug on this woke, anti-German and manipulative influence,” said Ulrich Siegmund, the party’s parliamentary group co-leader in Saxony-Anhalt, when promising to “terminate” the public broadcasting agreement.
And it’s not just in Germany. Across Europe, right-wing governments have shown how political power can be used to reshape the rules governing the media, weaken independent journalism and make life increasingly difficult for outlets that scrutinise those in power.
And we are already seeing the warning signs here in Britain.
Just last week, Reform UK blocked a Left Foot Forward journalist from attending its party conference, claiming it was “overcapacity” for media applications, despite the party selling additional late-registration media passes for £100.
Other journalists who have investigated Reform were also refused passes, including Michael Crick, Peter Geoghegan, whose conference pass was rejected less than an hour after he published a story revealing how Isabel Oakeshott, the right wing journalist, had privately called Reform mega donor Christopher Harborne “untrustworthy.” The Guardian’s Anna Isaac, who broke the story about Nigel Farage accepting an undeclared £5m gift from crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne, was also refused a pass.
This is the party that routinely presents itself as a defender of free speech while portraying the media as part of an Establishment conspiracy against it.
When attacks become law
Russia provides the bleakest example of what happens when such parties have the power to change the rules governing the media.
Following Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the government introduced laws criminalising what it deemed “knowingly spreading false information” or “discrediting” the military.
The legislation effectively destroyed what remained of Russia’s independent media. Outlets were forced to close or flee the country, while Novaya Gazeta suspended its coverage of the war because of fears the new laws would be used against its journalists.
As Professor Marko Milanovic of the University of Reading wrote: “The freedoms of speech and protest have been dying a long, slow death in Vladimir Putin’s Russia.”
Hungary offers another example.
Viktor Orbán used his parliamentary majority to rewrite the constitution and introduce sweeping media laws. His government took control of public broadcasting while changing the legal and regulatory environment in ways that helped government-friendly oligarchs acquire private media.
Reporters Without Borders estimates that the Orbán government came to control around 80% of Hungary’s media outlets. The pattern is clear: first, discredit journalists as biased or hostile, then change the laws and institutions governing the media, and finally, use those powers to reshape what the public is allowed to see and hear.
Italy under Giorgia Meloni has also seen concerns over press freedom, including the use of defamation cases against journalists and public figures. Italy has fallen from 41st to 49th in the World Press Freedom Index since Meloni’s party came to power. When the European Commission flagged this in a rule of law report, Meloni accused left-leaning Italian media of twisting its findings. Last summer, the Italian prime minister was caught telling Donald Trump at the White House: “I never want to speak to my press.”
And as for Trump, since returning to office, he has used lawsuits, threats against broadcasters, restrictions on journalists’ access and the power of government agencies to put pressure on media organisations.
Last month, Walt Disney sued the Federal Communications Commission, accusing the Trump administration of launching a “retaliatory campaign” against its ABC television networks over their broadcasts. Trump has repeatedly called for the FCC to revoke ABC’s licences.
Reporters Without Borders has warned that Trump’s administration is not merely attacking journalism rhetorically but reducing the physical and institutional space in which journalists can operate.
“It’s a very basic tactic but a fundamental hit to press freedom,” said Clayton Weimers, executive director of Reporters Without Borders USA. “Just as he wants to control the narrative in print and on the airwaves using government pressure or lawsuits against media outlets, he’s also trying to control the narrative by restricting the press’s access to spaces where crucial decisions are made, avoiding transparency and accountability,”
A politician complaining about an unfavourable coverage is one thing, but when a government changes the law, controls regulators, threatens licences or turns the courts and state institutions against media organisations, the stakes are entirely different.
And what about Reform and its dubious ‘Free Speech Bill’?
Ahead of the 2024 general election, Reform pledged that a Reform-led government would begin reforming what it described as the “out-of-touch,” “wasteful” and “institutionally biased” BBC within 100 days of the next Parliament.
Its manifesto, rebranded as “our contract with you” rather than a manifesto, promised to scrap the TV licence, which it branded “taxation without representation”. “In a world of on-demand TV,” it declared, “people should be free to choose.”
The party also called for a Free Speech Bill, supposedly designed to protect “personal freedom and democracy,” while promising to legislate against what it described as “left-wing bias and politically correct ideology.” It pledged to put an end to “cancel culture,” “left wing hate mobs” and “political bias in public institutions.”
The contradiction is difficult to miss. Reform presents itself as the defender of free speech while simultaneously proposing to use legislation to combat viewpoints and ideas it considers too left-wing.
In his party conference speech last week, Nigel Farage pledged to eliminate “obstacles” to his plans, declaring he would use a “national emergency” if he wins power. He also threatened to overhaul the House of Lords and how judges are appointed if they stood in the way.
Identifying the judiciary as another potential “obstacle,” Farage promised to remove the judges’ ability to rely on conventions such as the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR).
“Parliament makes the law, judges interpret the law. We will do whatever it takes, and perhaps have to consider how judicial appointments work in the future,” he said.
The ‘national emergency’ tactic is familiar in Trump’s America, where emergency powers have been used to justify sweeping changes to government and the law. Critics have warned that normalising the language of permanent crisis risks weakening democratic norms and giving governments greater scope to exercise extraordinary powers, including over the media.
“In any emergency-power regime, it’s crucial that the ‘emergency’ trigger be carefully defined and cautiously applied, lest the state of emergency become the new normal,” said David Pozen, a Columbia University law professor. “Yet that seems to be exactly what Trump wants – to govern in perpetual crisis model.”
And warnings about what a Reform government could mean for the free press and the laws governing are are also mounting.
In August, Labour’s Bridget Phillipson accused Reform deputy leader Richard Tice of a “chilling attempt to silence a free press” after he sent a legal threat to the Guardian over its reporting on his financial affairs.
The National Union of Journalists has also condemned Reform’s restrictions on journalists, urging all political parties to “demonstrate their commitment to media freedom and uphold the public’s right to be informed.”
Even Kemi Badenoch warned that the party’s behaviour could offer a glimpse of how it might govern.
“I think you could … [see] what kind of government they would be – authoritarian and using state power actually to pursue opponents is what they’ve effectively been threatening.
“We believe in free speech. We believe in a free press. And yes, of course, that might be painful for us as politicians, but public scrutiny is part of the gig. If Nigel Farage can’t handle difficult questions about his dodgy £5m then he shouldn’t be a politician.”
Farage’s complaints about the media are hardly convincing when so much of the right-wing press has spent years giving him and Reform a sympathetic platform.
But the victim narrative remains politically useful. Reform can cast itself as an outsider battling a hostile Establishment while simultaneously behaving like a political organisation that wants to control which journalists get access to it.
The crucial issue, however, is not whether Reform dislikes Left Foot Forward, the Guardian or any other publication.
It’s what happens if a party that regards critical journalism as an attack acquires the power to change the laws governing journalism itself.
Russia, Hungary and Trump’s America show why that question matters.
Free speech is not simply the right of politicians to say what they want.
It’s also the right of journalists to scrutinise those politicians, and the ability to do so without governments changing the law to punish them for it.
That is the real test of whether a government believes in a free press. And one Reform should be prepared to answer.
Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead is author of Right-Wing Watch
The mask has slipped for Reform UK once again. Arron Banks, a key Reform backer and close ally of Nigel Farage, has complained about there being not “one white face in security or airport services” at Heathrow.
One of Reform’s former mayoral candidates, Banks has previously hit the headlines for paying private investigators to dig into the Conservative party chair Kevin Hollinrake and Times journalist Gabriel Pogrund.
He is now facing widespread condemnation for his ‘racist’ and ‘disgraceful’ comments, after complaining that there was not “one white face in security or airport services” at Heathrow.
Banks posted on X: “Going through Heathrow today, there wasn’t one white face in security or airport services. The Home office is staffed by the type of people we are trying to keep out! What hope?”
Journalist Dan Hodges wrote: “There we go. One of Nigel Farage’s key allies. Eventually the mask slips. Not sure you could find a more blatant example of outright racism than this.”
Political editor of HuffPost UK Kevin Schofield posted: “When people show you what they are, believe them”, another added: “I do hope the staff at Heathrow read this and lose his luggage.”
Reform UK continues to become the home of failed Tory politicians, after yet another former Conservative MP defected to Nigel Farage’s party.
Despite just four months ago Zia Yusuf vowing that no more Tories would be joining the party, Jane Stevenson who was elected the Tory MP Wolverhampton North East in 2019, but lost her seat to Labour at the 2024 general election, has now defected to Reform.
She told the BBC that she wanted to pursue “more radical solutions to our country’s problems”.
“I especially like Reform’s work from Danny Kruger on reducing and reorganising Whitehall/quangos and bringing back ministerial power and accountability,” she said.
So much for Reform being anti-establishment, the party is now the refuge of failed Tories.
Reform MP Robert Jenrick has now said that the Reform member who attacked a woman with a crutch at Reform conference last week “should be given a medal”.
In an interview with LBC on Monday, Jenrick justified the Reform supporter attacking the woman and said he had “zero sympathy” for her.
Speaking to TalkTV’s Peter Cardwell yesterday afternoon, a viewer asked Jenrick to apologise to the young female Climate Resistance protester who was hit over the head with a crutch by a pensioner at the conference.
The viewer also asked if the pensioner had had his Reform membership suspended.
Jenrick said: “I’m not going to apologise.”
He said it was “an occupational hazard if you’re a professional protester who goes into conferences, tries to disrupt the speech of the leader”.
Jenrick added: “Remember this is a leader whose life has been threatened in recent times. This was a speech that had been delayed because counter-terrorism police…”
The protesters did not threaten violence against Farage or attempt to attack him. However, the police has confirmed it is now investigating incidents in which five protesters were attacked by Reform conference attendees.
West Midlands Police has also said that counter terrorism police had no involvement in Reform conference and did not tell Reform to delay Farage’s speech due to a threat.
Cardwell said: “Did that person deserve to get walloped over the face with a crutch? Is that reasonable?”.
Jenrick responded: “Peter, Peter come on. A professional protester is moaning that an old age pensioner knocked her with a crutch. I mean come on. Honestly I just think it’s completely and utterly ridiculous.”
The TalkTV presenter added: “It wasn’t just that. They had their hair pulled. Have you not a smidgeon of sympathy Robert… none whatsoever?”.
Jenrick said: “I don’t have any sympathy for her, no. In fact I’m sorry for the OAP who’s had his picture plastered all over the papers, he should be given a medal for what he’s done.”
The Metropolitan Police have announced that they have launched an investigation into allegations that Reform UK broke the law on political donations after an undercover Channel 4 report.
It comes after footage was released by undercover reporters showing senior members of Farage’s team appearing to plot to avoid electoral laws on foreign donations in an undercover investigation broadcast by Channel 4 News.
A senior aide to Farage, Dan Jukes, was filmed suggesting a way to get around electoral law to secure a foreign donation of £500,000 for Reform UK.
Electoral law in the UK states that to be a permissible donor to a UK political party you must be a UK registered voter, or a company registered in the UK.
In a statement, the Metropolitan Police said they had “assessed the information provided and determined that there are potential offences requiring investigation”.
A Met spokesperson said it had received “a number of reports relating to donations and polling involving a political party”, after the film by Channel 4 News and Verbatim Investigations was shown on Thursday evening.
In its statement, the force said: “All allegations under investigation relate to potential offences under the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000.”
“Detectives continue to liaise closely with the Electoral Commission and Crown Prosecution Service as enquiries progress.”
A Reform spokesman said: “Reform UK denies any wrongdoing and will fully co-operate with the investigation.
“We won’t be commenting further while a live investigation is under way.”
The West Midlands Police is continuing its investigation into assaults on five people at Reform conference last weekend.
Video footage has been circulating on social media of protesters being assaulted on Friday at Reform’s conference.
The protesters were part of Climate Resistance, and disrupted Nigel Farage’s keynote speech on Friday afternoon.
In response, Reform conference attendees are seen attacking the hecklers.
In one video, an older man with a walking stick is seen hitting a female protester over the head, while another grabs her mouth and people push her.
Reacting to the assaults, Reform MP Robert Jenrick said he had “zero sympathy” for the protesters who were attacked.
He also justified the violence carried out by members of the audience, saying: “What do you expect them to do?”.
Farage laughed at the disruption and said: “We’ve got a screamer. Oh dear.”
The Reform leader also said to the conference hall: “That poor young girl, she looked like she was going to do herself an injury”, before adding, “boring, boring, boring”.
The police have been urging the protesters who were attacked to come forward.
In a statement, the West Midlands police force said: “To date, none of the victims involved have come forward. We continue to encourage them to do so.”
The statement added: “A number of suspects have been identified as the investigation progresses.”
LFF spoke with a Climate Resistance activist who attended Reform conference at the weekend, who said she was unsure if one of the women who was assaulted would report the incident to the police.
Almost three quarters of the public view Nigel Farage as sleazy, while similar numbers view Reform itself as disreputable, according to a new YouGov poll.
The YouGov poll, carried out between 6 and 7 September, has found that 73% of voters view Farage as sleazy, including 56% who see him as “very sleazy”.
This means the public views him as the sleaziest political leader in UK politics, with other politicians including Keir Starmer and Andy Burnham viewed as less sleazy.
According to the poll, 51% of voters view Starmer as sleazy, and 35% said they think the same of Burnham.
Even among supporters of Farage’s own party, 41% of Reform UK voters think he is sleazy.
Meanwhile, 35% of Reform supporters also view the party itself as sleazy.
Reform UK is viewed as “very sleazy” or “fairly sleazy” by 71% of the surveyed voters, up by 20 points over the last two years.
This puts Reform on a par with the Conservative governments between 2019 and 2024, which received the same “very” or “fairly” sleazy rating.
By comparison, 55% of Brits view the Labour government since 2024 as “very” or “fairly sleazy”, while 38% of voters see the Greens as sleazy and 32% say the same of the Lib Dems.
YouGov has said that the undercover donations investigation into Reform published last Friday does not appear to have had an additional negative impact on perceptions of Farage or Reform.
The investigation carried out by Verbatim and broadcast on Channel 4 showed Farage, and former senior Reform aides James Orr and Dan Jukes plotting about how an American donor could bypass electoral law to donate money to the party.
Reform’s biggest donor Christopher Harborne is suing Ben Habib for libel over claims he made that Harborne had given Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson £1 million each to effectively rig the 2019 general election.
Habib made the comments in May, in an interview with Paul Thorpe, a right-wing Youtuber and former watch dealer.
In the interview, Habib, who left Reform in November 2024 over disagreements with Farage and Zia Yusuf, alleged “The 2019 general election was sewn up between Nigel Farage, Christopher Harborne and Boris Johnson, and it was a monetary deal”.
He added that Harborne could sue him, stating: “He can sue me, if he thinks that I’m lying”.
In November 2019, Farage announced that the Brexit Party would not field any candidates against the Conservatives in the 317 seats they won in the 2017 election.
Farage entered into the alliance, saying he felt reassured after Johnson said he would not accept an extension of the transition period for Britain leaving the EU beyond the end of 2020.
In November 2022, Harborne donated £1 million to The Office of Boris Johnson Ltd. Habib alleges that Farage also received £1 million.
The particulars of Harborne’s claim against Habib have now been published, and put before the court by Harborne’s lawyers, Shillings.
The document, which sets out the detailed facts, legal basis, and remedy sought by Harborne, accuses Habib’s statement of being “defamatory”.
It also states that “the Claimant’s [Harborne] reputation was seriously harmed” and that he “has suffered distress” as a result of Habib’s allegation.
The document does not disclose how much the British-Thai billionaire will be seeking in damages from Habib.
While many of us are used to Conservaties defecting to Reform and vice versa, what we haven’t seen before is a Reform councillor defecting to the Labour Party.
Nigel Swales was elected to Lancashire County Council in May 2025 as a Reform councillor and represents Skelmersdale East, however he has defected to the Labour Party saying that he had “growing concerns about Reform’s ability to deliver at a local level” and he had seen “first-hand” how “Reform simply doesn’t have a serious plan”.
Leader of the Labour group, Councillor Mark Clifford, told the BBC that the defection was “fantastic news”, adding: “We are really, really proud to actually get Nigel Swales to leave Reform and come to Labour, it’s brilliant news and this is just going to be the start of many more.”
Farage can’t be best pleased that his party continues to make the headlines for all the wrong reasons, as he lurches from one scandal to the next. Indeed, Swales cited Reform being embroiled in scandal as one of the main reasons he left Reform.
He told the BBC: “I’ve seen first-hand that Reform simply doesn’t have a serious plan or the leadership needed to deliver real change – people in Lancashire deserve representatives focused on getting things done rather than generating headlines, sowing division or playing political games.”
The probability of Nigel Farage resigning as leader of Reform UK by the end of the year has jumped from 25% to 40% after another bruising week for the party.
This follows the release of undercover footage showing conversations between Reform senior aides James Orr and Dan Jukes, as well as Nigel Farage, and a man posing as an American donor discussing how he could bypass electoral laws to donate to the party.
As reported by Nation.Cymru, Oddschecker shows that the likelihood of Farage leaving his post in 2026 is now 6/4, down from 3/1, with 79% of bets placed on the market over the past 24 hours backing his departure this year.
The odds imply a 40% chance of him going before the end of 2026, while he is 9/4 to leave next year and 4/1 to remain until 2028.
Oddschecker spokesperson, Chris Rogers, told Nation.Cymru: “Bettors are piling in the pounds on a 2026 exit for Nigel Farage.”
“In light of the recent revelations about illegal foreign donations, Farage’s odds to leave before the end of the year have been cut from 3/1 to 6/4.
“Punters are bullish in their support of an imminent exit for the Reform leader with a colossal 79% of bets expecting his tenure to come to an abrupt end.”
Reform suspended Orr and Jukes after the undercover reporting by Verbatim was released.
Orr and Jukes had arranged for a US company to fund three polls costing £32,500 which were allegedly commissioned by Reform ahead of local elections in England.
The supposed donors behind the company were in fact undercover reporters from investigative group Verbatim posing as a wealthy American and his UK-based son.
UK electoral law states that to be a permissible donor to a UK political party you must be a UK registered voter, or a company registered in the UK.
The revelations overshadowed Reform UK’s conference over the weekend.
Reform MP Robert Jenrick has justified Reform members hitting a protester over the head with a cane at the party’s conference this weekend.
Speaking to LBC’s Lewis Goodall, Jenrick was shown footage of Reform members pulling a female protester by the hair and grabbing her mouth, while one man used a walking stick to hit her on the head.
Reform supporters also attacked several other protesters.
Activists from Climate Resistance infiltrated Reform UK conference and disrupted Nigel Farage’s speech on Saturday. The group has said it is “horrified at the violence” directed at the activists.
Goodall asked Jenrick whether the attacks were not “heavy handed literally” and “disproportionate”.
Justifying the violent attacks, the Conservative defector said: “What do you expect them to do?”.
The LBC journalist put it to Jenrick that they could have led the protester out rather than attacking her.
He added: “[She] probably didn’t need to be clubbed with a crutch.”
Jenrick said: “I don’t know how sympathetic I am towards that person. Not at all.”
Goodall reminded Jenrick that “she got clubbed with a crutch”.
Jenrick then laughed and mocked the woman for “infiltrating” Reform conference and “screaming abuse at the leader of a party” and then “moaning that a pensioner knocked her on the head”.
“Come on! Get a life,” Jenrick said.
Speaking to LBC, the woman who was attacked said: “Nigel Farage himself, as well as members of the audience, are inciting this violence by celebrating assaults like the one I experienced.
“In fact, this morning Lee Anderson joked, joked about it by offering to buy a new cane for the man who assaulted me, which I think is simply pathetic.”
“They say they work to protect women and girls, yet they assault us when we try to criticise them.”
Reform’s home affairs spokesperson Zia Yusuf said he condemned the assaults.
He said: “On the question of whether I condemn people punching people, yes, I condemn people punching people.”
Farage refused to condemn the violence. Speaking to journalists on Saturday, he said: “It’s all one way, isn’t it? I can have milkshakes chucked in my face, be bashed over the head with placards and that’s all fine. That’s absolutely fine.
“Yet, well, we have a big event that people have paid a lot of money to come to and we get people there trying to disrupt it and we remove them. Suddenly we’re in the wrong. Utter nonsense.”
Reacting to Jenrick’s comments, Independent MP Shockat Adam wrote on X: Reform UK: “The party of “free speech” and “protection of women” …”.
West Midlands Police has said it is aware of the video circulating online but that they haven’t received a complaint.
Police are calling on the woman to come forward so they can carry out enquiries.
Nigel Farage has been mocked for celebrating Iceland’s decision not to restart talks on joining the European Union, despite the country already enjoying many of the benefits of close integration with the bloc.
On August 29, Icelanders voted against resuming EU accession talks 13 years after negotiations were abandoned. Of the more than 225,000 people who voted, 52.8 percent rejected the government’s proposal, while 47.2 percent backed it.
Prime Minister Kristrún Frostadóttir’s centre-left government had promised a referendum by 2027, but brought the vote forward amid growing international tensions, including President Donald Trump’s threats towards Greenland.
For Farage, however, the result was a triumph for national sovereignty and a rejection of the European Union.
“Congratulations to Iceland on voting to keep their independence,” the Reform UK leader posted on social media.
But the celebration was widely mocked, with many reminding Farage that Iceland’s relationship with the EU is nothing like Britain’s after Brexit. Iceland is not an EU member, but it is already part of the European Economic Area (EEA), giving it access to the EU single market, and is part of the Schengen passport-free travel area.
“Reminder: Iceland is already in the EU’s single market and the Schengen free-travel zone – that’s not going to change!” one person pointed out.
“But they are already part of the EU’s single market and Schengen border-free zone. So they do have more sense than us!” another wrote.
Another commenter mocked what Iceland’s arrangement might mean for Reform’s own definition of independence:
“So they kept their independence but are full members of the EEA, Schengen travel area, adopts the main freedoms, full member ECHR and pays in to the budget. Is that now official reform policy for UK independence too? If so sign me up.”
And therein lies the problem with Farage’s triumphalism.
Icelanders were not asked whether they wanted to leave the European Union. They were not asked whether they wanted to tear up existing agreements with Brussels, leave the single market or restrict freedom of movement.
They were not even asked whether they wanted to join the EU. The referendum asked whether the government should resume accession negotiations. Any eventual agreement on membership would then have been subject to a separate referendum, potentially as early as 2028.
That makes the Icelandic vote a rather awkward example for anyone seeking to use it as evidence of a broad European rejection of the EU.
As Dr Simona Guerra, senior lecturer in comparative politics at the University of Surrey and author of Central and Eastern European Attitudes in the Face of Union: A Comparative Perspective, has pointed out, that Iceland presents a particularly unusual case when it comes to understanding attitudes towards the EU.
“Most referendums on the EU ask citizens to evaluate something they already live inside. Icelanders were in the odd position of being asked to evaluate a relationship they have never had.”
She argues that the result demonstrates why attitudes towards the EU cannot simply be reduced to a question of support or opposition.
“For the study of public Euroscepticism, Iceland makes clear that attitudes to the EU cannot be reduced to levels of support and opposition, because those levels presuppose that citizens know, with some adequacy, the thing they are for or against. Iceland was asked to decide about a membership it has never experienced and, offered the chance to find out, narrowly chose not to.”
The Guardian’s Europe correspondent Jon Henley made a similar point, arguing that Iceland’s circumstances bear little resemblance to Brexit.
“Its situation bears precious little relation to Brexit or even to a broader EU-critical movement. Icelanders did not vote to isolate themselves from the EU, tear up any treaties or “take back control” – they voted to preserve a close, customised and largely successful relationship.”
Indeed, Iceland is already deeply integrated into the European economy. Through the EEA, it participates in the EU single market and accepts the free movement of goods, capital, services and people. It is also part of Schengen and operates under a range of EU-derived regulations and standards.
Its position highlights one of the central contradictions in the Brexit argument. It is possible to maintain formal national sovereignty while choosing to cooperate closely with European neighbours, participate in shared markets and accept common rules.
What Icelanders rejected wasn’t Europe, free movement or economic integration. They narrowly rejected taking the next step towards formal EU membership.
Iceland has maintained its independence while remaining firmly embedded in the European economic and travel systems that Farage and his fellow Brexit campaigners spent years attacking as constraints on British sovereignty.
If that is the model of independence Reform now wants for Britain, it would be quite a departure from Brexit.
Reform’s head of policy, James Orr, and his media aide Dan Jukes have stepped down after an undercover investigation revealed they had plotted ways to get around electoral law on foreign donations.
Reform said Jukes and Orr have been suspended pending an internal investigation.
However, in an interview this morning, Reform MP Lee Anderson said there is “no chance of them coming back” and “They have gone”.
In the undercover video footage, Jukes suggested a way to get around electoral law to secure a foreign donation of £500,000 for Reform.
The investigation was carried out by investigative journalism outlet Verbatim, founded by the Centre for Climate Reporting.
In one clip, Orr suggests that the undercover Verbatim reporter’s American father could pay for an opinion poll.
Orr said the poll would cost £18,000 plus VAT, and suggests the polling company could send the bill to the undercover reporter.
UK electoral law states that to be a permissible donor to a UK political party you must be a UK registered voter, or a company registered in the UK.
In this case, Reform aimed to get around electoral law by arranging for the British-born son of an American donor to pay for the poll using money provided by his father.
In all, Channel 4 News says Reform commissioned three polls costing £32,500 in total and that the public was not told who commissioned or funded them.
Not disclosing the funding of the poll and accepting foreign funding would both be illegal.
Orr said Farage wouldn’t know anything about who funded the poll. He said: “I wouldn’t breathe a word of this to anybody. Nigel doesn’t know, won’t know. It’s the kind of thing he would rather not know.”
However, in another clip, an actor posing as an American businessman says he was “thrilled” to have been able to “pick up the tab” for the JL Partners Poll that Reform commissioned.
Farage agreed: “Yes, that was great!”, indicating he was aware of who funded it.
Jukes denied any wrongdoing but said that he had “stepped back from politics in order to clear my name”.
He also said: “This was entrapment over a prolonged period of nearly a year by foreign-funded climate change activists.”
Nigel Farage said: “The party has not done anything wrong, but entrapped conversations don’t look good, and that’s why we’ve taken the action we have.”
Former Labour spin doctor Alistair Campbell wrote on X: “If Orr and Jukes have had to step down then so should Farage. He was in on the whole thing, as was clear from the footage. Waiting to hear bluster from Richard Stupid Tice shortly … a clue to his conduct. The louder he shouts the guiltier they are.”
Login
