logo
Reform UK are a real and present danger in Scotland

Reform UK are a real and present danger in Scotland

The National27-05-2025

On Saturday, a considerable number of far-right protesters took to the streets in cities across Scotland and the UK as part of what they called 'The Great British National Strike'. They rallied in Aberdeen, Dumfries, Dundee, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Inverness and Perth, as well as a number of cities south of the Border, in protest against immigration and net-zero policies, among other issues.
In Glasgow, they waved the flag of Israel and the Union flag, as well as banners adorned with slogans including 'free Tommy Robinson'. They were heard chanting 'refugees not welcome here'. The group was met by counter-protesters from a broad coalition of left-wing community groups and political organisations, and the far-right were ultimately outnumbered – but not by much.
The far-right bloc was undeniably substantial, and was an unavoidable presence for anyone wishing to make use of our city-centre shops this bank holiday weekend.
READ MORE: I went to Glasgow's 'Great British National Strike' — here's what I saw
For those who were the target of their hateful ideology – particularly immigrants, Muslims and people of colour – they made the city centre a less safe place to be, and evoked traumatic memories of the violent far-right race riots which plagued the streets of England and the north of Ireland last summer.
For me, the protests weren't the only reminder of far-right rise at the weekend. Also on Saturday, I was in Stonehouse campaigning for the brilliant Ann McGuinness, the Scottish Green Party's candidate in the Hamilton, Larkhall and Stonehouse by-election, triggered by the very sad death of my friend, the SNP MSP Christina McKelvie.
This is the first Scottish Parliament by-election of the current Holyrood term, and the first parliamentary by-election in Scotland since Keir Starmer's right-wing Labour Government took power at Westminster.
It's seen as a test for a struggling SNP, a collapsing Labour Party, and the rise of Reform UK. While Reform are unlikely to win, it's clear they've been dominating the narrative of the campaign. Vox-pops by a number of media outlets asking people how they plan to vote have consistently shown a high rate of support for Reform. But they weren't the winners on the doors I knocked last weekend. By far the winner of the campaign so far, just over a week from polling day, was apathy.
A huge number of people made it clear they had no plans to vote, scunnered by a lack of change over several years and declaring 'they're all the same' when asked about the political parties on offer at this election.
Voters have tried the SNP, they've tried Labour and they've tried the Tories and none of them have been able to demonstrably and radically improve the lives of ordinary people.
That's not to in any way disparage Christina's brilliant work. I know she was a fantastic MSP for the communities she represented. She was a socialist, and she always fought for better for her constituents.
But she was one MSP out of 129. She's exactly proof of why we need more socialists elected to Holyrood across multiple parties.
Nonetheless, voters are clearly fed up. I spoke to a number of Reform voters on the doors in Stonehouse and very few of them would align themselves with the hateful protesters outside Buchanan Galleries just a couple dozen miles up the M74.
Most of them were just people who feel like they've tried every other option and nothing else has worked, so why not give Reform a go?
The thing is, I get it.
People can see their public services crumbling, their communities falling apart. Nigel Farage tells them it's the fault of immigrants, and then Starmer – a Labour Prime Minister – reinforces that idea. When almost the entire British political and media classes keep repeating the lie, it doesn't matter how untrue it is, people will believe it more and more.
It's precisely why Starmer's approach is so dangerous – and so clearly doomed to fail. It's precisely why we need more left-wing, socialist voices who can counter these dangerous ideologies.
We know that the real enemy of the working class arrives by private jet, not by small boat. We know that the rich are getting richer, with millionaires and billionaires hoarding the wealth created by the working people whose wages have stagnated over the past several years.
We know that it's not good enough to just talk the talk – we have to walk the walk, opposing cuts and fighting for the redistribution of wealth to fund our vital public services, making use of the full powers of devolution to tax the rich, and fighting for an independent Scotland where we have the full capability to build a fairer country.
Many of the final seats to be declared on each regional list next year will be closely fought between the Greens and Reform. With both the SNP and Labour moving rightwards (to varying degrees) we need more left-wing voices in the Scottish Parliament who can counter the far-right and their hate.
READ MORE: SNP figures believe Nigel Farage's Reform UK will come second in key by-election
On the doors in Stonehouse last weekend, there were multiple apathetic voters who were leaning towards voting Reform, or just staying at home. There were multiple who, after a conversation with our activists, will now be strongly considering voting Green.
There's little to no overlap in the policy platforms of our two parties, and there's not a huge number of Reform/Green swing voters.
But where Reform present themselves as anti-establishment (while being backed by billionaires and city bankers), Greens genuinely are against a status quo establishment which makes the rich richer and offers nothing for ordinary people. Our task, it's clear, is now to get that message out.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

St Mirren land dispute judgment a 'crucial precedent' for free speech
St Mirren land dispute judgment a 'crucial precedent' for free speech

The Herald Scotland

timean hour ago

  • The Herald Scotland

St Mirren land dispute judgment a 'crucial precedent' for free speech

The claim for damages surrounded comments made by Mr Wardrop around the legality of an application for public funds for a regeneration project including a well-being centre on what appeared to be club land. Lord Clark dismissed Mr Gillespie and Mr MacMillan's claim for damages, which might have amounted to £80,000 because he believed that Mr Wardrop's comments made surrounding the legality of the application in were in the public interest and were honestly held based on the evidence he had at the time - both defences under the Scottish law around defamation damages. Campbell Deane, head of BKF and Co who represented Mr Wardrop, said: "This case sets a crucial precedent in the application of Defamation and Malicious Publication (Scotland) Act 2021, particularly the public interest defence. READ MORE by Martin Williams "The ruling underscores the legal protection available to individuals who responsibly raise issues of public concern – even if they are ultimately mistaken in their claims. It affirms that Scottish defamation law now balances reputation rights with the importance of free expression in democratic discourse." Alan Wardrop (left) and St Mirren directors and Kibble execs Jim Gillespie and Mark MacMillan (Image: Damian Shields) Mr Deane represented former Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale in a successful defamation case battle in 2020, an appeal case of Wings over Scotland blogger Stuart Campbell, who claimed Ms Dugdale defamed him in a newspaper column three years ago. Mr Campbell lost the defamation case and demand for £25,000 in reputational damages at Edinburgh Sheriff Court when it was decided that while Ms Dugdale was incorrect to imply Mr Campbell was homophobic, she was protected under the principle of fair comment. Mr Deane in the Wardrop case said it was a defence to a defamatory statement if it relates to publication of a "matter of public interest and the defender reasonably believed that publishing it was in the public interest". He said: "This defence is designed to protect freedom of expression on issues that affect the public, so long as the individual making the statements acts responsibly, seeks to verify the facts, and is not motivated by malice. This ruling makes clear that raising concerns about governance, charity involvement, or the use of public funds can fall within the scope of public interest. "This ruling confirms that the defender does not need to be correct in the allegations. Rather, the defender must show that their belief in the truth and public value of the statements was formed through reasonable effort. "As the first judicial interpretation of this new defence in Scotland, the decision is likely to have a significant impact on how future public interest defences are framed." Stuart Munro of Livingstone Brown, solicitor for Mr Gillespie and Mr MacMillan, said: 'My clients required to bring this action after Mr Wardrop wrongly accused them of having a 'secret plan' to build on land owned by St Mirren FC and of lying about it. 'They are extremely pleased the judge, having heard detailed evidence from numerous witnesses, made it clear in his written judgment that there was no such secret plan, thus setting the record straight. 'Furthermore, the judgement underlines that Mr Wardrop's very public allegations were, as my clients have consistently stated, both untrue and defamatory. "The judge also agreed that Mr Wardrop's untrue and defamatory statements caused serious harm to their reputations. 'Notwithstanding the finding that Mr Wardrop was entitled to publish, the judge made it very clear that, the true facts having now been established, any future repetition of his claims would have serious consequences.' Alan Wardrop (Image: .) But Mr Wardrop said: "As a lifelong St Mirren supporter this entirely unfounded and misconceived court action has unquestionably proved difficult. To be banned from attending home football matches and have my motivations put under the spotlight, when all I was doing was trying to shine a light on a significant issue concerning St Mirren has been taxing. "Prior to applying to join the SMISA board, I had conducted detailed investigations as to the whereabouts of the land forming part of Kibble's applications for a well-being centre. I had done this, having been met with a wall of silence from the Kibble directors of St Mirren Football Club, Jim Gillespie and Mark McMillan to my repeated requests for information." He said he had maintained throughout the process that what he said in relation to the land dispute was "honest opinion" and what he brought into the public forum was "in the public interest". "I am delighted, but not in any way surprised, that the court has accepted that it was in the public interest to publish what I did. The law promotes free speech, and based on all my thorough and detailed enquiries, what I wrote was clearly a statement on a matter of public interest and I believed in the public interest to publish," he said.

Is Reform a right-wing party?
Is Reform a right-wing party?

Spectator

timean hour ago

  • Spectator

Is Reform a right-wing party?

If the problem with Labour is that it believes in nothing, the problem with Reform is that it believes in everything. The dispute over the burqa is only the latest example. In pushing Keir Starmer to ban the burqa 'in the interests of public safety', new MP Sarah Pochin undoubtedly spoke for a significant section of the party's supporters. For that matter, polling has previously indicated the British public's backing for a ban. For some, it is indeed a safety issue: presented with a stranger, covered head-to-foot, identifiable only by their eyes, how can we know who that person is, whether they ought to be there, and what their intentions are? For others, it's a symbol of the cultural separatism that sees entire communities of Muslims live parallel lives in Britain, indifferent or hostile to our inherited customs and conventions.

Why Tories must stop agreeing with Farage and start attacking him to survive
Why Tories must stop agreeing with Farage and start attacking him to survive

Scotsman

time2 hours ago

  • Scotsman

Why Tories must stop agreeing with Farage and start attacking him to survive

Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... On April 15, 2010, the UK held its first-ever televised general election debate, pitting Labour's Gordon Brown, the then Prime Minister, against David Cameron of the Conservatives, with Nick Clegg expected to do little more than make up the numbers. However, if that was the anticipated script, no one told Clegg, who spoke so persuasively that the catchphrase of the night was 'I agree with Nick' as both Cameron and Brown sought to side with him. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad In a snap YouGov poll after the contest, 51 per cent declared the Liberal Democrat leader to be the winner, with Cameron on 29 and Brown on 19. While 'Cleggmania' proved short-lived, the clear lesson was that agreeing with a political opponent tends to benefit them. Delegates at the Conservative party conference in 2023 pose for a photograph with Nigel Farage (Picture: Oli Scarff) | AFP via Getty Images A political cataclysm looms Fifteen years later, and the Conservatives' current strategy to defeat Reform UK, by echoing its rhetoric, is backfiring even more badly. While the 2010 debate was a one-off event, the Tories have effectively been campaigning for Reform for years. In Thursday's Hamilton by-election, the Conservative candidate received just 1,621 votes, down from 6,332 at the last Scottish Parliament election, while Reform got 7,088, not far behind the winner, Labour's Davy Russell, and the SNP in second. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad As the Scottish Tories prepare for their party conference this week, a major topic of discussion must be about finding ways to disagree with Reform, if they wish to survive what threatens to become a political event as cataclysmic as the collapse of the old Liberal party after the First World War. Farage is out to destroy the Tories, and they must be as determined and ruthless. There is much to go at. Many of Reform's policies are patently ridiculous and some are downright dangerous. Keir Starmer's claim that Farage would 'crash the economy' like Liz Truss was a good line, and the Conservatives need to find similarly resonant ways of highlighting the very real dangers of voting for Reform.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store