Many questions have surfaced since I left Reform UK. But perhaps it’s best to address the subject in reverse, starting with Nigel Farage’s response to my departure.
He said it was a champagne-popping moment. The icing on the cake of an already good day. He sung the song “the sun has got its hat on, hip hip hooray…”. In a sense, I could leave the article there. Given Nigel’s pleasure at my departure, I was absolutely right to depart.
His apparent pleasure was prompted by what he described as more attacks made by me on him than made even by the Labour Party. In fact, I am not aware of ever attacking him.
I have not impugned his integrity or character. I have never accused him of being bitter or twisted. I have made no ad hominem attacks, privately or publicly. Indeed, when interviewed on GB News, on the same day, I said how fond I was of Nigel. I suggested a group hug with him!
Unlike Nigel, I was not pleased by my leaving Reform. I was saddened, as I said on 28 November in my video explaining my reasons (can a link be included here please?).
As for his accusation that I am bitter and twisted: it is a convenient way to rubbish me and my valid criticisms. Needless to say I am neither bitter nor twisted.
I am not in politics for personal political advancement. I am in it because the UK faces an existential crisis: constitutionally, democratically, economically and culturally. I feel obliged to fight to save our country. There is no room for my being bitter or twisted.
My reasons for severing with Reform were mainly to do with the constitution of the party and some fundamental ideological differences. The final trigger to leave, was my being banned by the party from speaking to the very grassroots I had helped build and encourage.
On the structure of the party, it is mostly owned and controlled by Nigel. This cannot be right at any level. I have been pressing for Reform’s democratisation since before I joined the party. It has yet to take place.
Nigel said he would convert the company he owns from one limited by shares to one limited by guarantee. Such a conversion is not possible in law. A new company would need to be set up – none has been. Nigel’s comments were misleading.
Zia Yusuf said he had the finest legal minds drafting a first-class constitution. He did not. The document he produced was a rehash of a document I rejected before I joined Reform UK. In any event no application has been made to the Electoral Commission to have his constitution (or a new company) approved. Zia has also been misleading.
Is any of the above important? Yes, it is. Reform has no legitimacy banging the drum for British democracy whilst being controlled by one man. There can be no place either for misleading the public.
As for our ideological differences, in a nutshell, these are: Nigel accepts Brexit has been done, I do not. Northern Ireland has been left behind in the EU and Great Britain is hooked at the regulatory hip to the EU.
Nigel has said he thinks Northern Ireland will eventually unite with the Republic. I disagree and I would fight tooth and nail against such an eventuality.
Nigel has said he is not concerned by the massive rate of demographic change in the country. I am. Nigel has said he is not in favour of mass deportation. I believe anyone illegally in the UK should be detained and deported.
Nigel seems obsessed with recruiting Tories. I would be extremely circumspect of such recruitment and only accept those who believe in our vision. There can be no room for the wholesale recruitment of Tories. That would merely result in Reform replicating the Tory Party.
Reform may yet democratise, and Nigel may yet prove me wrong on all of the above. If he should do so, I will be the first to congratulate him and wish Reform well. Until then, I shall be keeping a close eye on the situation.
