Reform UK discussion

[yorkie]

But just to add, for future reference:

• it's best that members create threads themselves, when they want to go on a tangent
• if anyone sees a thread go off topic, please report the first such post, using the report link (at the bottom of the post)
• Messages for the moderation team should be trough direct channels only, and not in discussion threads

Thanks

 

[Harpo]

Zia Yusuf seems to have grabbed the Trump playbook, threatening Serco with the loss of all government contracts if it is ‘hostile to Reform’ and ‘a threat to national security’ over its stated unwillingness to be involved in mass deportations.

The only news outlet I can find covering it so far is the Telegraph which is paywalled.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/06/15/reform-vows-strip-serco-public-sector-contracts-deportation/

Zia Yusuf warns outsourcing giant it risks being labelled ‘a threat to national security’

Reform has threatened to strip outsourcing giant Serco of all its government contracts in a row over the party’s plan for the mass deportation of illegal migrants.

Zia Yusuf, Reform’s home affairs spokesman, warned in a letter on Monday that the company risks being labelled “a threat to national security” after The Telegraph revealed that company bosses had ruled out involvement in an ICE-style campaign.

He said such a position would suggest Serco “now believes itself to be an alternative power base to the duly elected government of the United Kingdom and is willing to act contrary to the interests of the British electorate”.

Mr Yusuf wrote: “If this were true, I am sure you appreciate a Reform government would be left with no choice but to view Serco as a threat to national security.

“I would understand if Serco refused to engage in partisan politics and maximised shareholder value ... However, we will not accept Serco or its representatives taking political positions as it suits you.”

He also attacked Serco for its “morally repugnant” role in managing asylum-seeker accommodation, accusing it of placing “unvetted men from countries like Syria, Afghanistan, Iraq and Iran into British housing estates without the knowledge or consent of local residents”.

“Even as it has emerged that some of these men are convicted rapists and have gone on to rape or murder local residents, Serco has aired no moral concerns,” Mr Yusuf added.

In an ultimatum, he gave the company until 6pm on Tuesday to clarify its position or be described as “hostile to a Reform government and therefore the British people

If Serco’s response suggested that it was unwilling to comply with a potential Reform government’s deportation policies, he said, the party would launch “an accelerated review” of all contracts the company held “with the aim of removing Serco” within a parliamentary term.

Responding to Mr Yusuf’s letter, Anthony Kirby, Serco’s chief executive, insisted that the company was apolitical but avoided any reference to Reform’s specific plans....

 

[Tetchytyke]

Zia Yusuf seems to have grabbed the Trump playbook, threatening Serco with the loss of all government contracts if it is ‘hostile to Reform’ and ‘a threat to national security’ over its stated unwillingness to be involved in mass deportations.

The only news outlet I can find covering it so far is the Telegraph which is paywalled.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/06/15/reform-vows-strip-serco-public-sector-contracts-deportation/

Reform has threatened to strip outsourcing giant Serco of all its government contracts in a row over the party’s plan for the mass deportation of illegal migrants.

Zia Yusuf, Reform’s home affairs spokesman, warned in a letter on Monday that the company risks being labelled “a threat to national security” after The Telegraph revealed that company bosses had ruled out involvement in an ICE-style campaign.

He said such a position would suggest Serco “now believes itself to be an alternative power base to the duly elected government of the United Kingdom and is willing to act contrary to the interests of the British electorate”.

Mr Yusuf wrote: “If this were true, I am sure you appreciate a Reform government would be left with no choice but to view Serco as a threat to national security.

“I would understand if Serco refused to engage in partisan politics and maximised shareholder value ... However, we will not accept Serco or its representatives taking political positions as it suits you.”

I wish they’d use his real name though. He’s not called Zia, he’s called Mohammed.

 

[ainsworth74]

Zia Yusuf seems to have grabbed the Trump playbook, threatening Serco with the loss of all government contracts if it is ‘hostile to Reform’ and ‘a threat to national security’ over its stated unwillingness to be involved in mass deportations.

The only news outlet I can find covering it so far is the Telegraph which is paywalled.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/06/15/reform-vows-strip-serco-public-sector-contracts-deportation/

If only it wasn't a terrible person for a terrible party with a terrible reason targeting a terrible awful company like Serco. I'd love for someone to actually strip them of their contracts (along with Capita and the various other outsourcers). A blight on the British state.

 

[Harpo]

If only it wasn't a terrible person for a terrible party with a terrible reason targeting a terrible awful company like Serco. I'd love for someone to actually strip them of their contracts (along with Capita and the various other outsourcers). A blight on the British state.

I was a bit ‘Arsenal v Man Utd’ - Shame only one of them can lose.

 

[Ted633]

I wish they’d use his real name though. He’s not called Zia, he’s called Mohammed.

Disagree. A lot of Muslims officially have their first name as Mohammed, but are called by another (usually their middle name). I work with a fair number of people called‘Mohammed’, but not one of them are actually referred to as such.

Also, we don’t call Boris Johnson ‘Alexander’, so it shouldn’t be any different to Mr. Yusuf.
See also - Gordon Brown (James), George Osborne (Gideon) and many others.

 

[ainsworth74]

Disagree. A lot of Muslims officially have their first name as Mohammed, but are called by another (usually their middle name). I work with a fair number of people called‘Mohammed’, but not one of them are actually referred to as such.

Also, we don’t call Boris Johnson ‘Alexander’, so it shouldn’t be any different to Mr. Yusuf.
See also - Gordon Brown (James), George Osborne (Gideon) and many others.

Yes I've always found the name business to be a bit tiresome. If they want to be called by a different one of their names then crack on. I know plenty of completely non-famous people that use a middle name rather than their first name. I do think there's a slight exception to the likes of Tommy Robinson (aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon) who, to my understanding, use a different name to (at least initially) conceal something about their past (in his case his assault of an off duty police officer in the early 2000s). But, as far as I'm aware, the like of Zia Yusuf or George Osborne go by the names they do from preference rather than an attempt to mislead.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Disagree. A lot of Muslims officially have their first name as Mohammed, but are called by another (usually their middle name).

Yes I've always found the name business to be a bit tiresome. If they want to be called by a different one of their names then crack on.

I'd normally agree, although his middle name isn't Zia either.

But we're talking about a man who calls himself Shadow Home Secretary when he isn't and who routinely uses that fictitious job title to come out and make public threats against his political opponents. So I think the situation is slightly different here, and much closer to Tommy Ten Names' situation.

I'd also say we should use Sue-Ellen Braverman's real name but I freely admit my only justification for that is that she apparently hates that name and therefore it would annoy her.

Also, we don’t call Boris Johnson ‘Alexander’, so it shouldn’t be any different to Mr. Yusuf.
See also - Gordon Brown (James), George Osborne (Gideon) and many others.

However, Reform supporters are always very very quick to point out that Zack Polanski doesn't use his birth name either. Whenever they talk about him they call him David Paulden, which was his birth name (his family previously changed their name from Polanski to Paulden to avoid anti-semitism, so he changed it back).

Geese, ganders, etc.

 

[Ted633]

I'd normally agree, although his middle name isn't Zia either.

But we're talking about a man who calls himself Shadow Home Secretary when he isn't and who routinely uses that fictitious job title to come out and make public threats against his political opponents. So I think the situation is slightly different here, and much closer to Tommy Ten Names' situation.

I'd also say we should use Sue-Ellen Braverman's real name but I freely admit my only justification for that is that she apparently hates that name and therefore it would annoy her.


However, Reform supporters are always very very quick to point out that Zack Polanski doesn't use his birth name either. Whenever they talk about him they call him David Paulden, which was his birth name (his family previously changed their name from Polanski to Paulden to avoid anti-semitism, so he changed it back).

Geese, ganders, etc.

His middle name is Ziauddin, that's good enough to be called Zia. Tommy Robinson is a completely different kettle of fish, who uses a completely different name to make himself sound like 'one of the people' (or to honour a football hooligan)

Agree, it's very questionable why he calls himself the Shadow Home Secretary, but that's a different issue. He should absolutely be called out on that

If Reform supporters want to point out that someone changed their name, they can go right ahead. I'd rather use my energy to question them on Reforms policies than argue about what name someone calls themselves.

 

[brad465]

Photo doing the rounds of Reform campaigners posing with an ‘I’d rather vote for Saville than Labour’. Extremely poor taste for a party which insists it has no problem with sexism or image problems…

So it's gone from "I don't trust Starmer because he let Saville off" to "I'd rather vote for Saville than Labour/Starmer." Talk about extremely fickle in one's excuses.

 

[Uncle Buck]

Zia Yusuf seems to have grabbed the Trump playbook, threatening Serco with the loss of all government contracts if it is ‘hostile to Reform’ and ‘a threat to national security’ over its stated unwillingness to be involved in mass deportations.

The only news outlet I can find covering it so far is the Telegraph which is paywalled.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/06/15/reform-vows-strip-serco-public-sector-contracts-deportation/

Which is fine, actually. If there was a company which said it was unwilling to implement decisions of a Labour government the exact same people criticising Yusuf for this would be up in arms about “unaccountable big companies”. In no case should a company be getting government contracts unless it is willing to fulfil them. Likewise civil servants should implement the government’s agenda as instructed. If their conscience won’t allow it, they should resign,

When a group of Foreign Office officials refused to implement a policy about the Gaza conflict, David Lammy threatened them, quite rightly, with the sack.

 

[Harpo]

Which is fine, actually. If there was a company which said it was unwilling to implement decisions of a Labour government the exact same people criticising Yusuf for this would be up in arms about “unaccountable big companies”. In no case should a company be getting government contracts unless it is willing to fulfil them. Likewise civil servants should implement the government’s agenda as instructed. If their conscience won’t allow it, they should resign,

When a group of Foreign Office officials refused to implement a policy about the Gaza conflict, David Lammy threatened them, quite rightly, with the sack.

No. There’s a world of difference between an employee and their employer’s instructions, and a company ethically distancing itself from certain government contracts.

 

[35B]

No. There’s a world of difference between an employee and their employer’s instructions, and a company ethically distancing itself from certain government contracts.

There is. But more worrying is the implied introduction of a loyalty test for government conrtacts, where if a company doesn't do one (in it's view, unethical) piece of work ALL of its contracts will be removed.

All power to any company's elbow for taking such a stance but it is a demonstration of why, irrespective of political platform, a Reform government would be dangerous

 

[Class 317]

Companies are allowed to decline contracts if they think they are morally wrong, illegal or are bad for thier PR.

Removing that right is a slippery slope.

I'm no fan of Servo but they see implementation of this policy as damaging to them and or open to challenges on whether it's legal.

Under law because something is government policy does not mean it's not open to subsequent legal challenges and corporate responsibility for being involved.

 

[gabrielhj07]

This made me chuckle earlier: Richard Tice claiming that Reform lost because it's supporters voted Labour just to get Starmer out

What people have voted for... is to get Starmer out...

They've reinforced that they want the Prime Minister gone.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/videos/cql124l51exo

 

[nw1]

There are various reasons for the result in Makerfield but I wonder if it shows Reform could have a big problem with their candidates. Kenyon was a "fruity" character, to put it mildly.

If he is at all typical of the kind of person that wants to stand for Reform, it suggests they might have problems attracting 650 non-"fruity" characters to stand at the next election.

 

[TravelDream]

There are various reasons for the result in Makerfield but I wonder if it shows Reform could have a big problem with their candidates. Kenyon was a "fruity" character, to put it mildly.

If he is at all typical of the kind of person that wants to stand for Reform, it suggests they might have problems attracting 650 non-"fruity" characters to stand at the next election.

You really have to question Reform's vetting process and their judgement as poor candidates have been picked time and time again for what are important by-elections.

Matt Goodwin, a posh southerner, was a terrible choice for Gorton and Denton. Kenyon had so many issues in Makerfield like his terrible social media past and total lack of knowledge on the issues.
Pochin (suspended by the Tories multiple times when she was one. Liability in front of the cameras. A bit nuts on many issues) was lucky in Runcorn, but even that was far better for Labour than many imagined. Reform won by 6 votes. That's a rounding error and it could have so easily been a Labour hold which would have made a very different narrative for Starmer.

On Makerfield, this isn't an ordinary seat. In any general election, it would be a top target for Reform (very white, older, quite working class, lower than average education levels, leave voting) and breaking into dozens would require them to win seats like it.

It is Farage's party at the end of the day and blame has to lay with him.

 

[Harpo]

It is Farage's party at the end of the day and blame has to lay with him.

Or alternatively, it’s Tice’s party and Farage is his useful idiot.

 

[contrex]

You really have to question Reform's vetting process and their judgement as poor candidates have been picked time and time again for what are important by-elections.

Does anyone remember Derek Beackon, who stood as a candidate for the BNP in 1990 in the Redcoat ward of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets?

 

[Welly]

Does anyone remember Derek Beackon, who stood as a candidate for the BNP in 1990 in the Redcoat ward of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets?

Thankfully no, I don't.

 

[contrex]

Thankfully no, I don't.

The French would say he was (is) nul en philo.

 

[Lighteight123]

I wish they’d use his real name though. He’s not called Zia, he’s called Mohammed.

This seems out of touch. Few folk with a first name of “Mohammed” (or similar) use this as their first name.

I'd normally agree, although his middle name isn't Zia either.

It’s hardly like he’s chosen a traditional English name. I doubt he’s trying to deceive anyone.

 

[nw1]

Does anyone remember Derek Beackon, who stood as a candidate for the BNP in 1990 in the Redcoat ward of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets?

Yes, unfortunately. More notable (in a bad way) was his actual win of a council seat in 1993.

 

[TravelDream]

Or alternatively, it’s Tice’s party and Farage is his useful idiot.

Tice certainly has a fair whack of power, but Farage is both the leader and the front man.
I've seen nothing to suggest Farage is a puppet of Tice and Farage is not unsmart and I don't think he'd allow himself to be put in such a position.

Does anyone remember Derek Beackon, who stood as a candidate for the BNP in 1990 in the Redcoat ward of the London Borough of Tower Hamlets?

Thankfully not.
But I am not talking about council candidates. Reform had them elected by the boatload in May and obviously they are going to range dramatically with a few slipping through the gaps.
It's terrible for the residents of their ward and council, and bad for the party's PR, but I realise no vetting, especially at such scale and speed, can be perfect.
However, these are by-election candidates and there is certainly time to vet them properly between the announcement and close of nominations.

 

[brad465]

Tice is completely unelectable as a party leader. He does not have anywhere near the political "charm" to win people over, if he did he wouldn't have let Farage take over in 2024. Furthermore, his Dubai residency will be used against him very hard by rivals claiming he doesn't have UK interests at heart.

 

[Railwaycat]

Farage says £5m gift spending details 'not public's business'

Rival parties have raised concerns over the gift received by the Reform UK leader before he became an MP.

www.bbc.co.uk

Nigel Farage has said "it's not the public's business" to know details of how he spends a £5m gift from a billionaire Reform UK donor.

Speaking to the BBC, the Reform leader said the money from British cryptocurrency investor Christopher Harborne was an "unconditional gift, I can spend it on cars if I want to".

Priceless.

 

[brad465]

Farage says £5m gift spending details 'not public's business'

Rival parties have raised concerns over the gift received by the Reform UK leader before he became an MP.

www.bbc.co.uk

Nigel Farage has said "it's not the public's business" to know details of how he spends a £5m gift from a billionaire Reform UK donor.

Speaking to the BBC, the Reform leader said the money from British cryptocurrency investor Christopher Harborne was an "unconditional gift, I can spend it on cars if I want to".

Priceless.

He's basically combined the Streisand effect with insulting the public. The former because his remarks have drawn more attention to the story, while telling the public what to think is essentially breaking the golden rule in politics: never insult voters, even if the insult is fairly accurate (and loses any moral high ground that could be claimed when it came to insults thrown at his voters).

 

[TravelDream]

He's basically combined the Streisand effect with insulting the public. The former because his remarks have drawn more attention to the story, while telling the public what to think is essentially breaking the golden rule in politics: never insult voters, even if the insult is fairly accurate (and loses any moral high ground that could be claimed when it came to insults thrown at his voters).

Yes, thankfully Farage's Teflon coating certainly looks like it is beginning to tarnish.

His best answer was the first - to pay for security. He should have fronted that answer out. The new answers of Ferrari cars/ none of your business will get voter's backs up.

 

[The Ham]

Yes, thankfully Farage's Teflon coating certainly looks like it is beginning to tarnish.

His best answer was the first - to pay for security. He should have fronted that answer out. The new answers of Ferrari cars/ none of your business will get voter's backs up.

Especially those who can't, due to the anti bribery laws, even accept much more than a bottle of wine (let alone an form of transport) from other companies that they work with.

If (or more likely when) Count Binface runs against him, all he needs to say is that if anyone ever gifts him more than £5,000 that at least 90% will be donated to a local charity.

In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if he found someone willing to gift him that much so that they could create a photo opportunity to prove that he did it.

Quite possibly with him handing over a cheque for 5 million (made up currency of the Recyclons) which just happens to be the on the day value of the other 10%.

 

[brad465]

Farage appears to be in even more hot water now:

Reform denies rules broken by Nigel Farage after benefits from ally were not declared

The Sunday Times says the Reform UK leader failed to register the support supplied by a cryptocurrency entrepreneur who had been convicted of fraud.

www.bbc.co.uk

Robert Jenrick says "no rules have been broken whatsoever" by Nigel Farage, after reports the Reform UK leader failed to declare benefits provided by an ally once convicted of fraud in the US.

The Sunday Times says George Cottrell supplied support, external including security and social media staff who worked on Farage's online content in the year before he was elected. It also claims Farage used a property rented by Cottrell near Buckingham Palace.

Jenrick, Reform's Treasury spokesman, told the BBC that Farage did not need to register the support as it was in a "purely personal capacity" before he became an MP.

The Liberal Democrats have asked the parliamentary standards commissioner to investigate.