Reform UK discussion

[dgl]

Pardon my cynicism but my 50p says the print company were told there was only one way they’d keep the lucrative Reform print contract

Exactly, unless the software does something wrong then the likelihood of a printing error is miniscule, it's not like the days of phototypesetting where a misaligned camera could cause things ti be missed off.

 

[Purple Train]

Exactly, unless the software does something wrong then the likelihood of a printing error is miniscule, it's not like the days of phototypesetting where a misaligned camera could cause things to be missed off.

I wouldn't put anything past Reform, but it can still happen. Somewhere in my possession I have a linguistics text printed off by my lecturer from a master copy, which I had to physically correct from said copy as the computer couldn't cope with random characters... And even if it was a conspiracy rather than a simple mistake, there are far more brazen wrongdoings to call out.

 

[Snow1964]

Seems Reform led Worcestershire Council are on brink of needing a financial bailout

Worcestershire County Council is facing "effective bankruptcy" its leader has said unless it gets emergency help from central government.
The authority is still waiting on an answer over £71m in Exceptional Financial Support (EFS), and on whether it can increase council tax by up to 10% from April.
Councillor Jo Monk, who leads the Reform UK run local authority, said its finances were "a mess" and raised the prospect of having to issue a Section 114 notice, which acknowledges the council cannot meet its spending commitments.
"We are on the verge of bankruptcy and need to make significant changes," she said.
Monk was joined at a media briefing on Friday by MP Richard Tice, Reform's deputy leader.
"Reform UK runs 12 councils across England - regrettably this one in Worcestershire is in the greatest financial distress and is right on the edge of receivership," Tice said.
"We've got to be honest with people about the state of things. They have inherited a mess, but they will turn it around."

Councillor Jo Monk, used to be a Conservative (before switching to Reform) so she was part of the team that created the mess, that she now claims Reform inherited.
Am I missing something (blaming her previous party) now she is representing Reform.

Reform UK warns Worcestershire County Council is facing bankruptcy

Worcestershire County Council is asking for £71m in emergency support.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[Class73Electro]

Seems Reform led Worcestershire Council are on brink of needing a financial bailout

Councillor Jo Monk, used to be a Conservative (before switching to Reform) so she was part of the team that created the mess, that she now claims Reform inherited.
Am I missing something (blaming her previous party) now she is representing Reform.

Reform UK warns Worcestershire County Council is facing bankruptcy

Worcestershire County Council is asking for £71m in emergency support.

www.bbc.co.uk

Seems to be the reform thing - complain about the "inherited mess"/state of the area/country, just don't mention who created the problems to start with..

 

[styles]

Exactly, unless the software does something wrong then the likelihood of a printing error is miniscule, it's not like the days of phototypesetting where a misaligned camera could cause things ti be missed off.

I used to be a company director of a print shop.

Misprints happened all the time.

Given the imprint is usually at the bottom of the page, I can absolutely see this happening through print shop human error.

I wouldn't rule out the print shop being bought off by Reform, but I doubt Reform would make a public claim about sending a copy with an imprint, knowing they are subject to a criminal investigation, if they hadn't actually sent it. They might be naive but I don't think they're that stupid.

 

[SuspectUsual]

I used to be a company director of a print shop.

Misprints happened all the time.

Given the imprint is usually at the bottom of the page, I can absolutely see this happening through print shop human error.

I wouldn't rule out the print shop being bought off by Reform, but I doubt Reform would make a public claim about sending a copy with an imprint, knowing they are subject to a criminal investigation, if they hadn't actually sent it. They might be naive but I don't think they're that stupid.

Total Reform spend with said printers is over £1.4 million. As I've said before, I bet they've been told that if they own up they won't lose the gig

 

[The exile]

Presumably Reform are still on the hook for distributing said leaflet…. Even if the distribution was outsourced and the leaflets sent straight from the printers to the distributors, they surely still bear responsibility.

 

[JamesT]

Presumably Reform are still on the hook for distributing said leaflet…. Even if the distribution was outsourced and the leaflets sent straight from the printers to the distributors, they surely still bear responsibility.

https://www.college.police.uk/app/policing-elections/investigating-electoral-malpractice

Candidate imprint rules RPA 1983 s 110
Section 110 of the RPA 1983 ( https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1983/2/section/110 ) requires that printed election material must include an imprint if it can reasonably be regarded as intended to promote or procure the election of a particular candidate in a particular electoral area. Promoting a candidate includes campaigning against one or more other candidates.

Similar imprint rules apply under the relevant legislation for elections to the Scottish Parliament, National Assembly for Wales, Northern Ireland Assembly and the position of police and crime commissioner.

This includes material that can be intended for another purpose as well and it is immaterial that it does not expressly name the candidate.

The candidate rules apply to election material distributed as part of a candidate’s campaign. They may also cover local non-party campaigners if they are campaigning for a particular candidate in a particular ward or constituency, including by campaigning against one or more other candidates.

Offences under this section can be committed by:

the promoter of the material
any other person by whom the material is so published
the printer of the document
A candidate or his or her election agent who would be guilty of an offence under this section is instead guilty of an illegal practice.

A defence is available if the person charged can prove that:

the contravention arose from circumstances beyond their control, and
they took all reasonable steps, and exercised all due diligence, to ensure that the contravention would not arise (and/or that a remedy was effected at the earliest opportunity)

(My highlighting)
Morally you may consider them responsible, but legally I think if they can show they did their side right then it would fall on the printer.

 

[styles]

Presumably Reform are still on the hook for distributing said leaflet…. Even if the distribution was outsourced and the leaflets sent straight from the printers to the distributors, they surely still bear responsibility.

It's not strict liability, and a defence to this charge that the printer made the fault would likely stand.

It is of course a hard lesson to learn as a political party comms officer. I doubt they'll make the same mistake again.

 

[The exile]

https://www.college.police.uk/app/policing-elections/investigating-electoral-malpractice

(My highlighting)
Morally you may consider them responsible, but legally I think if they can show they did their side right then it would fall on the printer.

Think you could make a fairly good case that not checking the printed output (or specifically commissioning the distributor to do so) would be negligence.

 

[styles]

Think you could make a fairly good case that not checking the printed output (or specifically commissioning the distributor to do so) would be negligence.

I doubt it, but I'm no lawyer.

Missing an imprint is quite easy.

The leaflet is obviously a Reform UK leaflet, so it's not exactly hidden.

I've seen the same happen with other political parties and they basically got a slap on the wrist.

 

[Horizon22]

Reform UK are being investigated for campaign material of a letter from a "concerned resident" that did not brandish the party logo/banner on it:

Reform faces police investigation over ‘concerned neighbour’ byelection letters

Material distributed in Gorton and Denton did not have legally required imprint stating it was funded by party

www.theguardian.com

The biggest giveaway the letter might be ominous, is the fact someone wrote a letter in 2026.

As someone who knows a bit about this sort of thing.

The "concerned resident" thing is not that much of a big deal in the wider scheme of things. The party as a wider collective has access to the electroral register, and if they want to get a quote from someone and have that on their leaflet they can indeed do so. It's obviously pretty poor form if that person doesn't exist, but if they do, that person individually doesn't need access to the register.

The imprint thing is much more dubious. You send artwork to a printer - they really shouldn't have any need to start messing around with it in any shape or form. Regardless of whether it is the printer's error, ultimately the electoral agent has the legal responsibility and it should have been checked when it returned and crucially not then been distributed. This makes me wonder that it was missed and Reform with their lack of experience have tried to cover this one up.

As for the printer being hundreds of miles away, that really means nothing and political parties of all colours do this all the time with distribution costs generally being minimal and if you can get a good deal with a printer doing 000s of leaflets, that distance cost is more than mitigated.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 9 Feb 2026 ==

Think you could make a fairly good case that not checking the printed output (or specifically commissioning the distributor to do so) would be negligence.

Indeed.

The process would be:

A) Party/candidate/agent sends artwork to printer/distributor
B) Printer/distributor creates content and either i) sends it to a distributor/starts to distribute or ii) sends back to the party/candidate/agent
C) Party/candidate/agent reviews and then distributes leaflets via chosen delivery method.

Clearly the link at C was flawed.

 

[brad465]

As someone who knows a bit about this sort of thing.

The "concerned resident" thing is not that much of a big deal in the wider scheme of things. The party as a wider collective has access to the electroral register, and if they want to get a quote from someone and have that on their leaflet they can indeed do so. It's obviously pretty poor form if that person doesn't exist, but if they do, that person individually doesn't need access to the register.

The imprint thing is much more dubious. You send artwork to a printer - they really shouldn't have any need to start messing around with it in any shape or form. Regardless of whether it is the printer's error, ultimately the electoral agent has the legal responsibility and it should have been checked when it returned and crucially not then been distributed. This makes me wonder that it was missed and Reform with their lack of experience have tried to cover this one up.

As for the printer being hundreds of miles away, that really means nothing and political parties of all colours do this all the time with distribution costs generally being minimal and if you can get a good deal with a printer doing 000s of leaflets, that distance cost is more than mitigated.

From what I've heard the "concerned resident" is a genuine person and did give permission for their name to be used in this way, however they did not write any of the letter itself, which was done by the central party team. I suspect the "author" agrees with the content somewhat, however this is essentially a case of putting a party message behind a specific voter to try and make certain elements of the message plausible.

 

[Horizon22]

From what I've heard the "concerned resident" is a genuine person and did give permission for their name to be used in this way, however they did not write any of the letter itself, which was done by the central party team
I suspect the "author" agrees with the content somewhat, however this is essentially a case of putting a party message behind a specific voter to try and make certain elements of the message plausible.

And Reform are not unique in doing this. It puts a "human touch" on a story and is basically a endorsement from a resident on how Candidate A stands up for me/us / is a hard worker etc.

 

[yorkie]

https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/2020905026806247585

WATCH: Nigel Farage calls for an end to working from home and the focus on work-life balance

"People aren't more productive working from home - it's a load of nonsense. They're more productive being with other fellow human beings"

This response is quite apt:

What a useless old fossil

And this response is absolutely spot on:

The data says different. A major Stanford study found hybrid workers were more productive and far less likely to quit. ONS data shows most UK firms saw no drop in output. What’s he basing this on?

While some people may need to be, or want to be, in an office environment all the time, I would say hybrid working is absolutely my preference and I am very happy with it.

I don't see how Reform could "ban" working from home, and if they attempt it, then the UK would surely lose jobs to other countries.

However, Reform is all about saying provocative statements that aren't based on reality but simply appeal to the far-right, racists, xenophobes, and people who are easily led. Hopefully there's enough normal/regular/sensible people to vote them out.

I've got no time for anyone who supports the likes of Farage, Orban, Trump or any of their ilk.

 

[Horizon22]

https://x.com/PolitlcsUK/status/2020905026806247585

This response is quite apt:

And this response is absolutely spot on:

While some people may need to be, or want to be, in an office environment all the time, I would say hybrid working is absolutely my preference and I am very happy with it.

I don't see how Reform could "ban" working from home, and if they attempt it, then the UK would surely lose jobs to other countries.

However, Reform is all about saying provocative statements that aren't based on reality but simply appeal to the far-right, racists, xenophobes, and people who are easily led. Hopefully there's enough normal/regular/sensible people to vote them out.

I've got no time for anyone who supports the likes of Farage, Orban, Trump or any of their ilk.

This is the issue often with right-wing reactionary stuff; it’s all black and white, little to no notion of nuance or compromise and normally little comprehension of the facts or complexity of most situations but just wanting to impose their supposed “common sense” view on the world. It’s populist nonsense, often interspersed with an undertone - sometimes overtly! - of xenophobic nonsense too.

It’s also quite ironic because they are the first ones to get outraged when something gets “cancelled” in a culture or social setting, which normally it isn’t anyway!

As for this particular story, it’s pretty common on the right-wing spectrum to suggest this under some outdated concept that if people aren’t physically in an office they can’t be managed or seen working, thus are presumed to be dossing around. There’s probably some truth to the social element having been lost somewhat and that chance for a “quick chat” gone, but some areas are also much improved too. WFH also pre-dates COVID and was already on the rise (albeit more gradually)

No doubt a few business owners have also got in his ear too, about how they can’t observe their workers and enforce toxic standards so well any more. What a shame.

 

[GusB]

While some people may need to be, or want to be, in an office environment all the time, I would say hybrid working is absolutely my preference and I am very happy with it.

I don't see how Reform could "ban" working from home, and if they attempt it, then the UK would surely lose jobs to other countries.

It's all down to the "strivers vs shirkers" narrative; how could anyone who works from home possibly be productive without a manager constantly observing them?

If Farage is pro-business then surely he'd support a policy that a) allows people to be more productive and b) helps a company cut down its overheads, thereby saving money and potentially making more profit.

I suspect that the businesses he's really rooting for are the wealth and asset management companies that have seen rents from their vast property portfolios plummet as companies down-size their office space.

 

[Bayum]

From what I've heard the "concerned resident" is a genuine person and did give permission for their name to be used in this way, however they did not write any of the letter itself, which was done by the central party team. I suspect the "author" agrees with the content somewhat, however this is essentially a case of putting a party message behind a specific voter to try and make certain elements of the message plausible.

Has it been confirmed that she didn’t write the letter? I’ve not seen anything to uphold this, in fact I’ve seen quotes from said author who confirmed she wrote it and agreed for her name to be included:

I was asked to support Reform; would I be willing to do a letter and put my name to it? And I said, ‘Yeah’, and I left the rest to them,” she said, when asked if she had written the letter

Reform faces police investigation over ‘concerned neighbour’ byelection letters

Material distributed in Gorton and Denton did not have legally required imprint stating it was funded by party

www.theguardian.com

 

[The exile]

This is the issue often with right-wing reactionary stuff; it’s all black and white, little to no notion of nuance or compromise and normally little comprehension of the facts or complexity of most situations but just wanting to impose their supposed “common sense” view on the world.

In the interest of balance, this is also true of extreme left-wing revolutionary stuff - or indeed of anyone who gets a bee in their bonnet about an issue. Although the “common sense” epithet does seem to have been hijacked by the right at the moment.

 

[alex397]

Surely Reform’s issue with working from home could backfire?

I can’t imagine working from home is only done by the ‘woke left’? There’s surely many right wingers who are also hybrid working and reaping the benefits?

Though they’re probably targeting retired people who think young people are lazy, or working people who went to the ‘university of life’ and ‘school of hard knocks’ and business owners who would happily bring back workhouses.

 

[yorkie]

Surely Reform’s issue with working from home could backfire?

I can’t imagine working from home is only done the ‘woke left’? There’s surely many right wingers who are also hybrid working and reaping the benefits?

Yes it could backfire, but I suspect most hybrid workers have more intelligence than to vote for Reform.

Though they’re probably targeting retired people who think young people are lazy, or working people who went to the ‘university of life’ and ‘school of hard knocks’ and business owners who would happily bring back workhouses.

This is exactly who this appeals to.

 

[JamesT]

Isn't the work from home stuff mainly aimed at the civil service? Which government can control.
It may be merely correlation, but productivity in the civil service fell off a cliff when they all started working from home during the pandemic and hasn't recovered since.

 

[bleeder4]

It's all down to the "strivers vs shirkers" narrative; how could anyone who works from home possibly be productive without a manager constantly observing them?

If Farage is pro-business then surely he'd support a policy that a) allows people to be more productive and b) helps a company cut down its overheads, thereby saving money and potentially making more profit.

I suspect that the businesses he's really rooting for are the wealth and asset management companies that have seen rents from their vast property portfolios plummet as companies down-size their office space.

There is some truth to it though. I work better under supervision - always have done, always will do. Occasionally I have to work from home, such as this week now for example, and my output always nosedives when I'm working from home. I never get through all the stuff on my To Do list. For example, I'm currently on RailUK forums when I should be working. If I was in the office I wouldn't be doing this. I'm sure some people can maintain productivity whilst at home, but certainly not everyone.

 

[brad465]

Isn't the work from home stuff mainly aimed at the civil service? Which government can control.
It may be merely correlation, but productivity in the civil service fell off a cliff when they all started working from home during the pandemic and hasn't recovered since.

The ONS's latest release has the below graph which does show that productivity is down on pre-covid, but the fall during covid is more or less in line with every other sector. The latest release has public service productivity around the 2014-15 level. While I can't tell for sure, when Brexit commenced the civil service had to hire a lot more staff and do a lot more work as a result of leaving the EU, so I wouldn't be surprised if this explains the productivity surge from 2016-19.

Public service productivity, quarterly, UK - Office for National Statistics

Quarterly estimates of UK total public service productivity, inputs and output, to provide a short-term, timely indicator of annual productivity estimates.

www.ons.gov.uk

(Image of ONS graph showing puvlic service productivity over the last 25 years up to 2024)

 

[AlterEgo]

Isn't the work from home stuff mainly aimed at the civil service? Which government can control.
It may be merely correlation, but productivity in the civil service fell off a cliff when they all started working from home during the pandemic and hasn't recovered since.

Civil service productivity has been an issue for a very long time, it far predates covid.

 

[JamesT]

The ONS's latest release has the below graph which does show that productivity is down on pre-covid, but the fall during covid is more or less in line with every other sector. The latest release has public service productivity around the 2014-15 level. While I can't tell for sure, when Brexit commenced the civil service had to hire a lot more staff and do a lot more work as a result of leaving the EU, so I wouldn't be surprised if this explains the productivity surge from 2016-19.

Productivity is the ratio between inputs and outputs. Hiring a whole bunch of staff would only increase productivity if the output increased by more proportionately than the increase in staff.

 

[Bantamzen]

There is some truth to it though. I work better under supervision - always have done, always will do. Occasionally I have to work from home, such as this week now for example, and my output always nosedives when I'm working from home. I never get through all the stuff on my To Do list. For example, I'm currently on RailUK forums when I should be working. If I was in the office I wouldn't be doing this. I'm sure some people can maintain productivity whilst at home, but certainly not everyone.

Isn't it a case of horses for courses though? It's true that some people do work better in the office under supervision, but conversely some people find working from home better. This could be for various reasons, for example if you work in a busy office but find that distracting, working from home where it's quieter and you can concentrate more is going to be more productive. Or if someone has a long, stressful commute every day they may be far less productive than if working from home. Some teams might not even work at the same office in larger organisations, so even being at the office doesn't mean you'll be in the same room as your manager or co-workers.

So there really is a case for both scenarios.

Productivity is the ratio between inputs and outputs. Hiring a whole bunch of staff would only increase productivity if the output increased by more proportionately than the increase in staff.

That depends though, if the work is complex then new staff may be less productive for some time.

 

[JamesT]

Civil service productivity has been an issue for a very long time, it far predates covid.

Yes, but as per the graph @brad465 posted, productivity was rising in the decade before the pandemic.

 

[Lewisham2221]

Farage has an issue with people not attending their place of work? Interesting...

 

[35B]

Productivity is the ratio between inputs and outputs. Hiring a whole bunch of staff would only increase productivity if the output increased by more proportionately than the increase in staff.

Now what (apart from Covid) could have happened between 2016 and now to impact the value of the output from government?