How has Reform UK responded to allegations of racism or xenophobia?
Executive summary
Reform UK has responded to allegations of racism and xenophobia with a mix of denials, targeted personnel actions, public counter-attacks on media and opponents, and claims that the controversies either strengthen the party’s core support or stem from vetting failures outside headquarters [1] [2] [3]. Critics say that removals have been selective and that leadership rhetoric—blaming journalists, opponents, or historical context—amounts to deflection rather than systematic accountability [4] [5].
1. Rapid expulsions and suspensions — showy but selective
When undercover footage and offensive social-media posts surfaced, Reform UK removed or withdrew support from a number of candidates and suspended others, publicly stating those who made “unacceptable comments” would no longer be part of campaigns, and withdrawing support for at least three parliamentary hopefuls amid a mounting row [4] [2]. Independent reporting and watchdog groups, however, documented dozens of problematic posts across many candidates, prompting critics to say these headline sackings masked a wider problem within the party’s ranks [5] [6].
2. Leadership denials and reframing of allegations
Nigel Farage and other senior figures have repeatedly denied the racism allegations as personal targeting or political motivated smears, with Farage calling some claims “complete made-up fantasies” and insisting he has “never directly racially abused anybody,” while urging focus on future elections rather than past events [7] [1]. The party has framed many accusations as either youthful “banter,” misremembered history, or attacks by political opponents and hostile journalists, a narrative amplified in media appearances and press statements [8] [9].
3. Counter-attacks on media and opponents — complaint filings and accusations
Rather than treating all allegations as internal issues, Reform UK has often hit back publicly: the party reported Channel 4 to the elections watchdog over its undercover reporting and accused broadcasters of bias, and senior spokespeople have levelled counter-accusations—claiming political rivals are the real racists in some disputes, as when the party accused Chancellor Rachel Reeves of “flagrant racism” during a benefits-row spat [2] [10]. This strategy reframes the debate as one of institutional bias or political warfare rather than culture-change within Reform UK itself [2] [10].
4. Blaming vetting companies and emphasising procedural fixes
When candidates’ offensive pasts emerged, Reform’s leadership sometimes blamed external vetting firms for alleged failures, arguing that third-party checks were inadequate and that the party had been unable to prevent some individuals slipping through [6]. At the same time, watchdogs and anti-racism groups such as Hope Not Hate contested the party’s narrative, saying the scale of problematic content undermined Reform’s claims of rapid professionalisation and effective vetting [5] [6].
5. Internal dissent, public scepticism, and the political gamble
The party’s hardline responses—dismissal of allegations, targeted sackings, attacks on media—have provoked mixed reactions: some local Reform figures urged “move on” and defended rapid action, while opponents, MPs and campaign groups called the measures “woefully inadequate” or proof of a deeper cultural problem, pointing to continued refusals to initiate independent investigations or full apologies [11] [12]. Farage has also argued the controversies may solidify his base rather than damage it, a political calculation supported by some internal polling and his public statements [3], but critics warn that such rhetoric risks normalising scapegoating and avoids addressing systemic issues documented by multiple outlets [13] [5].