Reform UK discussion

[Bletchleyite]

Seconded.

But the fact that she is a nasty piece of work and did break the law doesn't affect the other part of the argument, namely that the Police really aren't able to serve the "little guy" any more in the way they really should be, i.e. keeping them and their property safe from crime.

 

[RailWonderer]

Now I do feel the sliders on our free speech aren't liberal enough, but inciting arson and murder is rightly illegal. That is the illegal part of the communication; the problem with social media is it is seen by enough people to fill Wembley Stadium a few times over.

What if you talk about launching somebody with a trebuchet after flogging them? I'm just thinking if you make it humourous and cartoonish then it can't be taken seriously. Context is everything.

 

[JamesT]

What if you talk about launching somebody with a trebuchet after flogging them? I'm just thinking if you make it humourous and cartoonish then it can't be taken seriously. Context is everything.

Or famously, threatening to blow up an airport.

 

[AlterEgo]

What if you talk about launching somebody with a trebuchet after flogging them? I'm just thinking if you make it humourous and cartoonish then it can't be taken seriously.

You can fall foul of the law by simply being grossly offensive. I don't support this part of our law. I think people have the right to be disgusting, vile, and cause deliberate offence without criminal sanction. I do not think people should be allowed to harass, or incite violence or harm, against any person or group.

In your case it depends who the somebody is and the context you're making the remark in. If there's a race riot in your town and you say, online, in a conversation about the riot "I would launch (racial group) into the sun with a trebuchet, after flogging them of course" to 300K people then you're probably going to be in trouble. If Bruno Fernandes misses a penalty and you say "Had enough of this bloke now, flog him and launch him with a trebuchet", that is quite different.

Is the Communications Act 2003 bad? Yes. I would like to see it go. Is the Public Order Act which bans inciting racial hatred bad? No, that's an important part of living in a civil democracy.

Context is everything.

Of course it is, which is why Lucy Connolly, who tweeted "set fire to all the f*****g hotels full of the b*****ds for all I care...if that makes me racist so be it" (it does btw) during racially charged civil unrest where hotels were being set fire to, pleaded guilty to intending to stir up racial hatred.

She admitted doing so, and what she wrote really does not leave much wiggle room there.

Or famously, threatening to blow up an airport.

Depends which instance you're thinking of, but the Doncaster Airport guy was convicted - quite ridiculously - of this when it was clearly a bad taste joke, and subsequently cleared. However we're quite off topic now!

 

[alex397]

I’m finding this rhetoric around at the moment quite sickening.
The gradual drip feeding of hatred is a real cause of concern for me - this is how hatred is created which leads to violence.
Why is the topic of boats and Nigel Farage in the main news headlines every single day? It is an important issue, and rightfully reported on, but there are lots of other serious issues going on that do not get anywhere near the same coverage.
The ridiculous flag stuff, based on a xenophobic far right campaign, is getting out of hand now, and it needs to blow over right away.

 

[Yew]

Why is the topic of boats and Nigel Farage in the main news headlines every single day?

the amount of airtime the BBC gives Farrage is clearly disproportionate, and feels like it should be a clear breach of their impartiality obligations.

 

[Purple Train]

I’m finding this rhetoric around at the moment quite sickening.
The gradual drip feeding of hatred is a real cause of concern for me - this is how hatred is created which leads to violence.
Why is the topic of boats and Nigel Farage in the main news headlines every single day? It is an important issue, and rightfully reported on, but there are lots of other serious issues going on that do not get anywhere near the same coverage.
The ridiculous flag stuff, based on a xenophobic far right campaign, is getting out of hand now, and it needs to blow over right away.

I can't be the only one who only has an uneasy relationship with the flag of my country entirely because of the likes of Farage and Yaxley-Lennon. For some reason this irony is clearly lost on them.

 

[Sorcerer]

I can't be the only one who only has an uneasy relationship with the flag of my country entirely because of the likes of Farage and Yaxley-Lennon. For some reason this irony is clearly lost on them.

I understand why someone might feel uneasy about the English flag because of thugs like Yaxley-Lennon and the EDL. However I think that the best way of reclaiming it would be to normalise it being flown and getting people used to seeing it outside of a nationalistic context as long as it's flown in an appropriate place (such as public places but not somewhere like railway infrastructure for example).

In fact I would be willing to bet that some on within the far right actually want us to take down the flags so they can bring out their two-tier oppression of the whites narrative, hence why they're starting to raise it in settings where it isn't appropriate such as painting on road signs where they will inevitably need to be removed. I wouldn't put it past people on the far-right to do something so sinister.

 

[m0ffy]

the amount of airtime the BBC gives Farrage is clearly disproportionate, and feels like it should be a clear breach of their impartiality obligations.

100% this. Reform have four MPs. Only the SDLP, TUV, UUP, and Alliance have fewer seats. We hardly ever hear from the Lib Dems, and they have 72!

 

[SuspectUsual]

100% this. Reform have four MPs. Only the SDLP, TUV, UUP, and Alliance have fewer seats. We hardly ever hear from the Lib Dems, and they have 72!

Are the impartiality and fair coverage guidelines for the BBC based on share of MPs, share of the vote, or something else? Anyone know?

I have a bigger problem with Farage, Anderson etc being allowed to use GB News as Reform’s mouthpiece (and get paid fortunes to do it as well)

 

[m0ffy]

Are the impartiality and fair coverage guidelines for the BBC based on share of MPs, share of the vote, or something else? Anyone know?

I have a bigger problem with Farage, Anderson etc being allowed to use GB News as Reform’s mouthpiece (and get paid fortunes to do it as well)

It seems to be the share of the views of the political editor and their team. The last government “encouraged” the BBC to play to its tune.

 

[JamesT]

Are the impartiality and fair coverage guidelines for the BBC based on share of MPs, share of the vote, or something else? Anyone know?

I have a bigger problem with Farage, Anderson etc being allowed to use GB News as Reform’s mouthpiece (and get paid fortunes to do it as well)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/documents/2025local-election-guidelines.pdf Are the guidelines used at the last local elections. It refers to Ofcom guidelines on evidence of support https://www.ofcom.org.uk/siteassets...general-election-digest-may-2025.pdf?v=394371
These list both seats and share of vote.

 

[jon0844]

Are the impartiality and fair coverage guidelines for the BBC based on share of MPs, share of the vote, or something else? Anyone know?

I have a bigger problem with Farage, Anderson etc being allowed to use GB News as Reform’s mouthpiece (and get paid fortunes to do it as well)

Farage will get more views, and more people engaging (especially when the BBC re-posts on its social channels). It's as simple as that.

The BBC may be taxpayer funded, but it's still expected to compete for eyeballs - so it does what clearly works.

As I've said before, Labour needs to be more media savvy. They need to appear as often as possible to give their views, and be engaging and charismatic enough to get people watching. No easy task of course.

 

[Gloster]

Farage will get more views, and more people engaging (especially when the BBC re-posts on its social channels). It's as simple as that.

The BBC may be taxpayer funded, but it's still expected to compete for eyeballs - so it does what clearly works.

As I've said before, Labour needs to be more media savvy. They need to appear as often as possible to give their views, and be engaging and charismatic enough to get people watching. No easy task of course.

They need an Alastair Campbell. He may be a right ****, but he is a very efficient politico/media operator who would get at Reform’s jugular quickly and frequently.

 

[Yew]

The BBC may be taxpayer funded, but it's still expected to compete for eyeballs - so it does what clearly works.

Competing for eyeballs is fine, however compromising it's core mission is clearly not - the BBC charter states.

The Mission of the BBC is to act in the public interest, serving all audiences through the provision of impartial, high-quality and distinctive output and services which inform, educate and entertain.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 29 Aug 2025 ==

Why is the topic of boats and Nigel Farage in the main news headlines every single day? It is an important issue, and rightfully reported on, but there are lots of other serious issues going on that do not get anywhere near the same coverage.

I was recently talking to someone on the internet, who seemed convinced that if we just "stopped giving money to other countries and stopped the boat people" that we wouldn't need taxes.

Clearly, this was economically illiterate baby talk, but then again so was austerity, and people gobbled that infantile pseudo-economics up.

 

[styles]

Impartial doesn't merely mean correlating airtime minutes with UK parliament seats won.

Reform are clearly popular under a broken voting system (and for the record, if we had a different voting system, I don't think they would be as popular). They had a significant vote share in the general election and they won nearly half of all the council seats in the local elections in May.

To deny them airtime on the basis that they didn't manage to outwit FPTP is in my view hypocritical as many people who make such an argument are also proponents of electoral reform.

I find the BBC on the whole quite balanced in it's programming. In fact due to the amount of comedy it features, and most comedians being quite liberal, I find the non-politics programming to be socially liberal if anything. As for Lib Dems not being heard I don't really agree. We had a Lib Dem MSP on Any Questions literally today. Ed Davey got loads of airtime for his ridiculous stunts during the last election - it was his choice to spend his time pretending to fall off paddleboards rather than discussing policy.

 

[alex397]

I don’t think people want to deny Reform and Nigel Farage airtime. But the publicity they get just seems rather disproportionate to me.
I’d also be interested to know why the boats issue has featured prominently in most headlines over the last few weeks. Who decides that this is the most important issue facing the country? Arguably there are far more important issues that just don’t get the airtime.

 

[styles]

I don’t think people want to deny Reform and Nigel Farage airtime. But the publicity they get just seems rather disproportionate to me.
I’d also be interested to know why the boats issue has featured prominently in most headlines over the last few weeks. Who decides that this is the most important issue facing the country? Arguably there are far more important issues that just don’t get the airtime.

Well according to YouGov, 57% of people rank immigration and asylum as the most important issue facing the country today.

 

[Purple Train]

Well according to YouGov, 57% of people rank immigration and asylum as the most important issue facing the country today.

Might it be a little chicken or egg?

 

[jon0844]

Competing for eyeballs is fine, however compromising it's core mission is clearly not - the BBC charter states...

Yes, but when those two things absolutely conflict - it's clear that the one that says the BBC must justify its existence by getting the ratings will be seen as more important than the other.

BBC News has been decimated both on TV and online (written news) over the years (I personally know a lot of people that have gone in the last 10 years - so it isn't a recent issue), and I'm sure that as more and more jobs are up for review they'll only go down the ragebait/clickbait route that will destroy supposed independent news. Sky has the same issues, and now it seems to be only Channel 4 news that attempts to hold people to account - and plenty of people don't like that.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Aug 2025 ==

I don’t think people want to deny Reform and Nigel Farage airtime. But the publicity they get just seems rather disproportionate to me.
I’d also be interested to know why the boats issue has featured prominently in most headlines over the last few weeks. Who decides that this is the most important issue facing the country? Arguably there are far more important issues that just don’t get the airtime.

The BBC showed people in northern France for about two years back in late 2014 and into 2016. It was daily coverage. They had people in France, the UK, Germany, Sweden and at the entry points into the EU. They were at sea, and they had the media all talking about immigration then. I am certain this is what got a leave vote, and it's not as if Farage wasn't getting all the media attention at that time too.

It wasn't wrong to cover the issues (it was more people in France storming lorries and caravans etc to get into the UK via the Channel Tunnel then) but one could argue that there were other things going on that weren't being talked about.

I see the current situation as a repeat of that. Given the US stance on immigration and having gone ahead with mass deportations, it's easy to make it the only thing anyone cares about.. and divert attention away from the bigger problems. If we all believe our high taxes and highly priced supermarket goods are because of the £9.90 a week we give to asylum seekers (sorry, I meant free houses, cars, iPhones and PlayStation 5s) then we're beyond hope.

 

[Ted633]

I understand why someone might feel uneasy about the English flag because of thugs like Yaxley-Lennon and the EDL. However I think that the best way of reclaiming it would be to normalise it being flown and getting people used to seeing it outside of a nationalistic context as long as it's flown in an appropriate place (such as public places but not somewhere like railway infrastructure for example).

In fact I would be willing to bet that some on within the far right actually want us to take down the flags so they can bring out their two-tier oppression of the whites narrative, hence why they're starting to raise it in settings where it isn't appropriate such as painting on road signs where they will inevitably need to be removed. I wouldn't put it past people on the far-right to do something so sinister.

We've had some absolute whoppers on our local community page posting where and when they were going to hang flags on lampposts. Funnily enough, the police also turned up and stopped them.
Now we've got the gnashing of teeth about the police being anti - British etc. Was all very predictable unfortunately

 

[jon0844]

We've had some absolute whoppers on our local community page posting where and when they were going to hang flags on lampposts. Funnily enough, the police also turned up and stopped them.
Now we've got the gnashing of teeth about the police being anti - British etc. Was all very predictable unfortunately

Just Stop Oil has been joking on social media that they wish they'd known to use red paint instead of orange...

 

[styles]

Might it be a little chicken or egg?

Oh for sure that's part of it, but it's ranked in the top 3 issues for decades; that's not all down to Farage and his parties. Even those who are pro-immigration accept that the way we're handling immigration and asylum is pretty bad.

 

[WelshBluebird]

What if you talk about launching somebody with a trebuchet after flogging them? I'm just thinking if you make it humourous and cartoonish then it can't be taken seriously.

I'd suggest thst is very different to inciting arson when there are riots that involve people literally doing what she was tweeting about (trying to burn people alive by setting alight hotels).

Context is everything.

Indeed. Which is exactly why she was given such a sentence after pleading guilty.

 

[Bald Rick]

Well according to YouGov, 57% of people rank immigration and asylum as the most important issue facing the country today.

57% of people need to get a grip. I wonder how many of them are on a waiting list for NHS treatment?

 

[RailWonderer]

57% of people need to get a grip. I wonder how many of them are on a waiting list for NHS treatment?

It's the structural problems of the country like lack of growth, high sovreign debt, spending cuts and tax rises which makes it especially unjustifiable to be prioritising the right of people who broke the law by entering the UK over British people. Plus the Epping hotel judge runs a Labour linked socialist think tank, completely partial and should have been recused. The Reform vote is more about being antiestablishment.

 

[AlterEgo]

It's the structural problems of the country like lack of growth, high sovreign debt, spending cuts and tax rises which makes it especially unjustifiable to be prioritising the right of people who broke the law by entering the UK over British people.

Which law do asylum seekers break when they come here to claim asylum? Asylum seekers have the legal right to remain in the UK while their case is being decided. It isn't illegal for them to come here and because the UK does not decide asylum claims outside its own territory it means people claiming it (legally!) have to enter the UK without permission. This is not actually illegal for an asylum seeker to do in practice.

Plus the Epping hotel judge runs a Labour linked socialist think tank

Not true. He was the chair of the Fabian Society in 1989-90.

However if you want to play that game the origjnal judge who ruled in favour of the council actually stood to be a Tory MP four times.

, completely partial and should have been recused.

Recused by whom?

 

[PGAT]

Fundamentally the issue is the growing wealth inequality. The people at the top very much benefit from the current narrative which directs people’s anger down at those more vulnerable (ie asylum seekers, immigrants) rather than up top where all their money is flowing.

Say Farage gets into power and deports every illegal migrant, closes up our borders and “solve immigration”. What do you think happens next? (hint: we don’t go back to good old days)

 

[JamesT]

Which law do asylum seekers break when they come here to claim asylum? Asylum seekers have the legal right to remain in the UK while their case is being decided. It isn't illegal for them to come here and because the UK does not decide asylum claims outside its own territory it means people claiming it (legally!) have to enter the UK without permission. This is not actually illegal for an asylum seeker to do in practice.

Immigration Act 1971 made it an offence to enter the UK without permission.

 

[Gooner18]

I am not a particular Farage fan ,
However I am strongly leaning towards voting for Reform now , the final breaking of me was the Labour Party looking at increasing my retirement age which is already at 68. NOT A CHANCE ! On top of everything else , higher taxes , my wage again falling well behind inflation making me worse and worse off , the possibility of being heavily taxed when my parents pass away ( they are both working class)
NHS broken , no point in throwing more and more money at it , it needs to be effectively turned off and re-booted!
Police at breaking point , numbers dropping faster than they can recruit , increasing demand, massively underfunded, without law and order you have NOTHING!
It’s a dangerously unstable world so unfortunately we need to spend more on our military which I fully understand.
However what I want tolerate anymore is us spending millions and millions on hotels for asylum seekers on top of everything else they get while me , my family struggle everyday. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!

On a side note I find it strange that if a person in England flies the English flag is racism , yet it a Scottish , Welsh , Irish person does it , it’s patriotic. Very confusing