Reform UK discussion

[mikeg]

The theory is problematic because irregular immigration is also the leading issue in France, possibly with even more political consequences than the UK.

The French will exchange a few here and there, and put on a bit of security theatre (at great financial cost to the British) - but ultimately they don't want the immigrants on or near their territory either, including passing through to reach this mythical new British territory in France. You'd have to somehow lockdown this new British holding pen and prevent them from being able to make it back into "French" territory.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Sep 2025 ==


We clearly, collectively as a country, cannot fix the myriad of problems here - nor does anyone trust the Labour or Conservative governments to do so in the future either. If it were possible, we wouldn't have been deteriorating further into this political and societal collapse for the last 20 odd years.

Reform likely also don't have the answers, but when the population is desperate to address these issues, what have they got to lose by giving the new party a try? People voting Reform aren't, for the most part, in any way racist. Calling them so just makes them more popular in any event - history loves a perceived underdog taking on the establishment and saying outrageous things that politicians don't typically say.

Most people in the UK genuinely just don't want people arriving here by illicit boats and their occupants making claims for asylum whilst the taxpayer funds their meagre existence in perpetuity until someone figures out what to do with them. Most of the arrivals are economic migrants in search of a better existence, so you can't blame them for trying in my opinion, but it's not sustainable and they do need to be stopped.

That isn't racist.

Whether or not it is racist, it is xenophobic and it is also stupid. Small boat arrivals constitute a very small proportion of immigrants to this country, though I grant you they have driven illegal immigration in the past couple of years. The data also suggest that there has been an increase in returns of irregular migrants (sources for both these claims: Unauthorised migration in the UK.

More people were detected arriving in the UK without authorisation in recent years, mostly after crossing the English Channel in small boats​

The number of people detected arriving in the UK without authorisation has increased sharply in recent years, driven by the rise of the small boats route across the English Channel. Between 2020 and the end of September 2024, around 175,000 unauthorised arrivals were recorded by the authorities. Of these, 78% arrived in the UK after crossing the Channel in a small boat.


While reports of people attempting to enter the UK by crossing the Channel go back over fifty years, significant numbers did not begin to be detected until late 2018. From 2020, numbers increased rapidly. Several reports suggest that the initial emergence of the small boats route was a consequence of increased border enforcement that made it significantly harder for people to arrive in the UK through other irregular means, including as stowaways on trains and lorries. British and French authorities invested heavily in border security after 2014 to prevent such journeys. Growing experience and the professionalisation of smuggling operations are likely to have contributed to a significant expansion of the route.

There are some nice bar graphs to view here too for those who want the data visualised.

Of course this article acknowledges many evidence gaps, I think it was Tony Blair who said of illegal immigration that by definition it is illegal, so by defintion we don't have exact figures (or words to that effect).

Obviously it is a problem, but we're getting better at repatriation of irregular immigrants (when did you last here the tabloid press or REFUK celebrate that?). They (REFUK supporters) also act like stopping the boats (Which I, and for the record, the Labour Party and Conservative Party support), will be cost-free and easy. There's a reason they aren't being stopped in the numbers we would like: None of these factors apply. Defending the border against small boats is by definition expensive. They also don't mention leaving the Dublin convention due to Brexit, etc. has compounded the problem of returns to other European nations.

They may or may not be racist, but they are low-information voters and we've listened to them enough recently. Furthermore, I'd like to know how they've actually been affected by it, rather than just being told they're affected by it in the gutter press?

I'm sorry but I used to be more charitable and have more time to explain things to such people. It appears they don't want engagement, they just want trouble. In the 90s and 2000s we were okay when all major parties pressed on with doing actual political work to deliver results without listening too much to such people. I suggest we go back to that.

 

[AlterEgo]

We clearly, collectively as a country, cannot fix the myriad of problems here - nor does anyone trust the Labour or Conservative governments to do so in the future either. If it were possible, we wouldn't have been deteriorating further into this political and societal collapse for the last 20 odd years.

Reform likely also don't have the answers, but when the population is desperate to address these issues, what have they got to lose by giving the new party a try? People voting Reform aren't, for the most part, in any way racist.

There is a lot of racism in Britain, but in any event we are talking about the creeps putting up flags who know exactly what they are up to, not "all Reform voters".

Calling them so just makes them more popular in any event - history loves a perceived underdog taking on the establishment and saying outrageous things that politicians don't typically say.

That hasn't really been the case in Britain, which is a country marked by historic political stability. Fascism has been relatively unpopular here and Britain has been vastly less radical than most of its European counterparts. Britain's latest race riots were tepid in comparison to what you see elsewhere.

Most people in the UK genuinely just don't want people arriving here by illicit boats and their occupants making claims for asylum whilst the taxpayer funds their meagre existence in perpetuity until someone figures out what to do with them. Most of the arrivals are economic migrants in search of a better existence, so you can't blame them for trying in my opinion, but it's not sustainable and they do need to be stopped.

That isn't racist.

Of course that isn't racist, but it isn't the crux of the issue for the flag brigade. The asylum situation is totally unacceptable and what you have said is mainstream opinion. The flag botherers are a fringe minority who dislike migrants mostly based on their race or ethnicity. Those people are racist.

 

[weeklycommuter]

Reform UK however do not have an opinion poll lead in Scotland. The SNP has a commanding opinion poll lead in Scotland for the next general election and the next Scottish Parliament elections. People in Scotland of course also voted 62% to 38% in support of staying in the European Union. If Reform UK were to win the next UK general election I see Scotland voting to become an independent country.

SNP out in front in Scotland as Starmer’s satisfaction ratings fall

New Ipsos polling for STV News shows the SNP on a 31% share of General Election voting intention, nine points ahead of the Labour Party.

www.ipsos.com

Our headline estimate of General Election voting intention is:
SNP: 31%
Labour: 22%
Reform UK: 16%
Conservatives: 10%
Scottish Green Party: 10%
Liberal Democrats: 9%
Alba Party: 1%
Other: 1%
Our headline estimate of Holyrood constituency voting intention is:
SNP: 34%
Labour: 23%
Reform UK: 14%
Conservatives: 10%
Liberal Democrats: 9%
Scottish Green Party: 9%
Alba Party: 1%
Other: 1%
Our headline estimate of Holyrood regional list voting intention is:
SNP: 26%
Labour: 22%
Reform UK: 16%
Scottish Green Party: 15%
Conservatives: 10%
Liberal Democrats: 8%
Alba Party: 2%
Other: 1%

 

[mikeg]

Reform UK however do not have an opinion poll lead in Scotland. The SNP has a commanding opinion poll lead in Scotland for the next general election and the next Scottish Parliament elections. People in Scotland of course also voted 62% to 38% in support of staying in the European Union. If Reform UK were to win the next UK general election I see Scotland voting to become an independent country.

Assuming of course a Reform government would allow that. The mainstream unioninst parties have been quite cold on indyref2, one can only imagine a Reform government would be outright hostile to such a prospect and constitutionally it is not within Scotland's gift to secede unilaterally. Were I in Scotland however, a Reform governement would probably be just what it takes to make me want Scottish independence (I'd normally describe myself as a federalist and soft unionist).

 

[geoffk]

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

Perhaps the law needs to change so that broadcasters must ensure that all parties have a proportionate amount of airtime outside election periods - proportionate based on their actual representation, not on polling figures.

 

[styles]

Perhaps the law needs to change so that broadcasters must ensure that all parties have a proportionate amount of airtime outside election periods - proportionate based on their actual representation, not on polling figures.

FPTP is bad enough, but restricting broadcasts to only those who have benefitted from the system will really solidify the useless two-party governance at Westminster.

 

[dangie]

There is a lot of racism in Britain.....

Correct, and it doesn't just happen with the nationalities you would think.

Some years ago we had German friends staying with us. We went into a local pub. Someone came up to us and said 'What are they doing in here?' 'They' meaning Germans.

 

[SuspectUsual]

First day back after summer recess, and Farage is in America pretending Trump even knows who he is any more, and Tice is giving a press conference

There should be an automatic mechanism whereby these grifters are held to account for not doing their jobs.

Take your kids out of school? Fined.

MP swans off to America? Nothing

(And yes I realise not every MP is in the house for every session, but these lot are taking the p*** now)

 

[geoffk]

FPTP is bad enough, but restricting broadcasts to only those who have benefitted from the system will really solidify the useless two-party governance at Westminster.

But all parties are entitled to party political broadcasts in the run up to elections, based on a formula set by Parliament (but I can't find out what that is).

 

[styles]

But all parties are entitled to party political broadcasts in the run up to elections, based on a formula set by Parliament (but I can't find out what that is).

It's 5 years between general elections. The odd couple of minute clips broadcast to the people who watch ad breaks (they're not strictly in ad breaks but separate programmes, but in reality they're between actual programmes) on live TV is hardly going to correct no political programme presence for nearly 5 years.

Democracy cannot be seen to merely be about one cross in a ballot box every 5 years, even if we had a half-decent voting system.

 

[JamesT]

But all parties are entitled to party political broadcasts in the run up to elections, based on a formula set by Parliament (but I can't find out what that is).

Parliament delegated setting the rules to Ofcom. Currently there's a minimum of one Party Election Broadcast for any party contesting at least a sixth of the available seats, and a minimum of two for 'Major Parties'. Major Parties being a list defined by Ofcom based on previous electoral performance.
But these are minimums, the broadcasters are editorially independent and can choose to go beyond this in their coverage. (e.g. they're free to choose who to invite to leader's debates)

 

[SuspectUsual]

None of that matters if you have your own in-house propaganda station GB News though does it?

 

[m0ffy]

None of that matters if you have your own in-house propaganda station GB News though does it?

And an entirely captive print media. And a state broadcaster that provides an uncritical platform for the right.

 

[75A]

None of that matters if you have your own in-house propaganda station GB News though does it?

No different to Labour and the BBC.

 

[SuspectUsual]

No different to Labour and the BBC.

You honestly think the likes of Kuennsberg are pro-Labour?!?

 

[Bletchleyite]

You honestly think the likes of Kuennsberg are pro-Labour?!?

One thing I find is that people of all political persuasions think the BBC is biased against them. What this says to me is that the BBC is not in fact biased, but rather is extremely good at investigative journalism which by definition is biased against anyone it might be investigating, and so it should be.

 

[Lewisham2221]

One thing I find is that people of all political persuasions think the BBC is biased against them. What this says to me is that the BBC is not in fact biased, but rather is extremely good at investigative journalism which by definition is biased against anyone it might be investigating, and so it should be.

Where's the like button?

I've said this before, elsewhere on these forums I think, but the very fact that the "left" seems to think the BBC is biased in favour of the "right" and vice versa suggests to me that the BBC is in fact as politically unbiased as it should be.

 

[JamesT]

Where's the like button?

I've said this before, elsewhere on these forums I think, but the very fact that the "left" seems to think the BBC is biased in favour of the "right" and vice versa suggests to me that the BBC is in fact as politically unbiased as it should be.

Or maybe that left and right are actually fairly useless terms? The BBC has as an institution a particular worldview that doesn't necessarily align with any of the political parties. I don't think any news outlet is truly unbiased.

 

[Gloster]

No news outlet can be completely unbiased, nor should it be: it should be bias in favour of telling the truth without fear nor favour. I believe that the BBC tries far harder to do this than just about any other outlet. There is an old adage that if you are being criticised by all sides, you are probably doing something right.

 

[JGurney]

No different to Labour and the BBC.

Show us facts.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Sep 2025 ==

Perhaps the law needs to change so that broadcasters must ensure that all parties have a proportionate amount of airtime outside election periods - proportionate based on their actual representation, not on polling figures.

Not really practical as coverage will also depend on how far each party is involved in newsworthy events, which may not be proportionate to either of those factors, e.g. a scandal might lead to a party being mentioned many times.

 

[styles]

No different to Labour and the BBC.

I think you'd be hard-pushed to find a more neutral non-print news provider in the UK than the BBC to be honest. Channel 4 does a decent job mind.

 

[jon0844]

First day back after summer recess, and Farage is in America pretending Trump even knows who he is any more, and Tice is giving a press conference

There should be an automatic mechanism whereby these grifters are held to account for not doing their jobs.

Take your kids out of school? Fined.

MP swans off to America? Nothing

(And yes I realise not every MP is in the house for every session, but these lot are taking the p*** now)

I'm getting so sick of seeing Farage that I'm seriously considering moving to Clacton so I never have to see him again.

 

[weeklycommuter]

Assuming of course a Reform government would allow that. The mainstream unioninst parties have been quite cold on indyref2, one can only imagine a Reform government would be outright hostile to such a prospect and constitutionally it is not within Scotland's gift to secede unilaterally. Were I in Scotland however, a Reform governement would probably be just what it takes to make me want Scottish independence (I'd normally describe myself as a federalist and soft unionist).

The reality is that if independence was clearly supported by a large majority of people in Scotland (which has not so far been the case) any UK Government would have no choice but to negotiate independence for Scotland. Everyone knows what happened in Ireland just after World War One when the UK Government tried to keep the whole of Ireland in the UK.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'm getting so sick of seeing Farage that I'm seriously considering moving to Clacton so I never have to see him again.

Very well done, sir. I will copy that with pride.

 

[brad465]

I'm getting so sick of seeing Farage that I'm seriously considering moving to Clacton so I never have to see him again.

Farage has been missing from Clacton for so long, I was able to claim £5,000 off of Essex Police by providing them with information leading to his whereabouts.

 

[Welly]

Farage has been missing from Clacton for so long,

First he was the "Clacton Toad" now he is the "Clacton Ghost"

 

[Bantamzen]

Some people have touched on this, but the wider problem with Reform's rise is that not enough people are asking why they are rapidly gaining in popularity. I don't mean asking amongst their own political peers, then downright dismissing anyone vaguely leaning in the direction of Reform as racist or ignorant. The main parties need to climb down off their high horses and start to engage with the people heading to Reform, and even those shouting at hotels or painting flags on roads.

Whether people want to believe it or not, but there are increasing numbers of people who feel disengaged from the political system and largely ignored by decision makers. It's this perception that Farage has jumped on, again. He did it successfully during the Brexit campaign, and he might just do it again (Trump also did it in 2016 & 2024). Forget opinion polls, politicians and their strategists need to pay more attention to what is happening on social media, because it is there that you will find the true picture of what people are thinking and how they are feeling. As mentioned above Trump's campaign in 2016 tapped right into this, getting a real feel for the mood of the room and even being able to use social media quite legally to lean some undecided voters in their direction.

Any party or supporters who dismiss the impact that Reform might have in coming years, may do so at their peril. The Conservatives made this error at the last general election, they assumed that Labour would make no gains and dismissed the idea of Reform eating into their share, which what really cost them the election. All parties are likely to make the same mistake unless they get out there, park any prejudices and find out why people are unhappy. Otherwise it will be Farage time!

 

[jon0844]

How do you convince people who think Covid wasn't real, that 5G is intended to control us, that cities will soon stop allowing people to leave (15 minute cities), EVs and net zero is worse than drilling for more oil because they're not really green and don't save the planet, and so on?

These are people so easily led into believing wild conspiracy theories and then start to believe everything else they're told - like asylum seekers living in 4 star hotels with free phones and cars.

Many of these people could be considered victims because they're being played by not only politicians but the likes of the oil industry and other large powerful companies and corporations that want you to look down and not up.

As I've said before, Reform can't win by relying on rich people voting (and businesses can't vote) so they must get the masses to be convinced.

 

[SuspectUsual]

Whether people want to believe it or not, but there are increasing numbers of people who are told by Nigel Farage that they feel disengaged from the political system and that they are largely ignored by decision makers

How do you convince people who think Covid wasn't real, that 5G is intended to control us, that cities will soon stop allowing people to leave (15 minute cities), EVs and net zero is worse than drilling for more oil because they're not really green and don't save the planet, and so on?

These are people so easily led into believing wild conspiracy theories and then start to believe everything else they're told - like asylum seekers living in 4 star hotels with free phones and cars

Exactly this. I was about to reply to @Bantamzen with the edits in bold

The working people of the UK are no more or less "ignored" by politicians than they have been for decades. The objective degree to which they are ignored is debatable, but its fair to say that politicians have always taken a lot more interest at election time and to some degree take advantage of the electorate, and equally its fair to say that 90%+ of the working class electorate have never really cared about politics until Farage and his ilk got involved.

Social media has made all this possible

 

[JGurney]

Forget opinion polls, politicians and their strategists need to pay more attention to what is happening on social media, because it is there that you will find the true picture of what people are thinking and how they are feeling.

I am very dubious. From personal experience, while I answer opinion polls and surveys that come my way, I do not participate in any social media apart from occasionally looking at the local 'NextDoor' page. I know for a fact that social media cannot possibly provide a true picture of my own thought or feelings, while to some extent I do feature in those polls and surveys. I am sure I am not the only one.

At the last local elections, NextDoor was filled with pro-Conservative messages and anti-Lib-Dem vitriol about 20mph limits, and I gather from Facebook users it was much the same there. According to social media, there was a Conservative landslide coming. In reality the Lib-Dems were returned with increased majorities.