The Reform UK figurehead addressed the biggest Reform UK rally so far in Scotland, but declined to speak with local journalists following the event. In his place, recently switched peer the former Conservative donor took on the task of responding to queries on allegations of racism and anti-Jewish sentiment surrounding Farage.
Farage introduced the ex-Tory lord and millionaire donor during a packed event of about 700 attendees at a hotel conference centre in central Scotland. Offord, who served as a junior minister for Scotland in the previous administration and was until recently treasurer of the Scottish Conservatives, announced his intention to give up his peerage in order to stand for the party in next May’s Holyrood elections.
The leader stated he was “extremely pleased” to greet the new member. He called the peer’s defection as “a courageous and significant move”.
The Reform leader addressed the rally following a difficult period which saw him launch a fierce criticism of the broadcaster after they quizzed him about an investigation into alleged racist and antisemitic behaviour as a youth. But, the leader avoided the expected press huddle after Saturday’s event.
When asked why his new party’s leader did not make himself available to address growing claims about his past behaviour, the new recruit responded: “That is a question for him to answer.”
Pressed on if he thought an apology was necessary for the comments he is said to have made towards Jewish pupils, Offord said: “I think that’s something he’ll need to consider with his own advisers.”
Offord insisted that Farage was “ethically suitable” to be prime minister and rejected claims of 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 authorised the complete transformation of Glasgow's demographics?”
Although the first minister, John Swinney condemned Farage’s original remarks as “racist”, and Keir Starmer called them “toxic and divisive”, Offord maintained that Farage was “highlighting a factual issue that people are talking about on the doorstep”.
The event, filled with an lively and passionate audience 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 in the past year, securing 26% of the vote in its first Holyrood byelection test. Following Scottish Labour's decline, Reform has regularly pushed it into third place in recent months, polling up to 22%.
Declaring that Reform UK membership in Scotland 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 powerful situation” at Holyrood.
Thomas Kerr, one of Reform’s 19 Scottish councillors, prompted a roar of approval as he referred to the leader as “the future PM of the UK”. He instructed the crowd to “man the barricades as we take on the political establishment”, warning that “the coming campaign will be difficult”.
Despite not yet publishing a distinct policy platform for Scotland, speakers from the north-east pledged Reform 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 the political scene in Scotland over the past 12 months, admitting to the audience that he was once told he “wouldn’t get 20 people in a room”.
As the event was taking place, not far away in Falkirk town centre, demonstrators with opposing views assembled for what have become regular weekly confrontations outside a local hotel where asylum seekers are now housed.
A group coordinating protests stated they were motivated by a serious local crime. In an interview, Scotland's leader warned that the tactic of the far-right is to apportion the blame … to new arrivals and I think that is the source of a harmful narrative”.
He also made a clear distinction extremist opinions and people with “legitimate points” about strain on public services or community safety.