The tightrope Farage is walking on race – and why he can only lose
What were Reform playing at this week, apparently allowing their newest MP Sarah Pochin to ask Keir Starmer at Prime Minister's Questions whether he would follow other European countries and consider banning the burka? After all, it seems to have led to the resignation of their successful chairman Zia Yusuf.
To answer this question, it is worth looking at Reform's other interventions on cultural issues in recent times. For there have been a number of occasions when senior Reform politicians have brutally engaged in the most sensitive and controversial cultural areas. There is a clear pattern.
Just recently, Nigel Farage made clear he felt Lucy Connolly, the mother jailed for posting offensively on social media about the riots that followed the appalling murders of children in Southport, should not be in jail.
Last July, Connolly posted on X hours after Axel Rudakubana murdered three girls in a knife rampage at a Taylor Swift-themed holiday club in Southport.
She wrote: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f---ing hotels full of the b------s for all I care, while you're at it, take the treacherous government politicians with them. I feel physically sick knowing what these [Southport] families will now have to endure. If that makes me racist, so be it.'
Politicians from across the political spectrum have said that the punishment meted out to Connolly was disproportionate.
Farage went further than most, saying: 'The sentence that was given to her was absolutely excessive and while she should not have said what she said, understand there were millions of mothers at that moment in time after Southport feeling exactly the same way.'
The Reform leader also recently said we need to choose which migrants from which countries come to Britain. At the same time, he has been vocal about the grooming gangs that existed across northern England, refusing to condemn some of Elon Musk's increasingly-bizarre social media commentary about the issue at the start of the year (Musk falsely claimed that the Home Office had sent a memo to police ordering them not to investigate alleged abuse because young women had 'made an informed choice about their sexual behaviour').
There are many other examples of Farage seeking to intervene on cultural issues, while carefully walking along a tightrope.
In the past, when Farage was merely the most prominent politician in two start-up parties – Ukip and the Brexit Party – his strategy was obvious: simply to generate attention. At that time, he could say things which many (even most) people found offensive, because all that mattered was going up a few points in the polls by attracting small numbers of people who agreed with him.
But Reform now engage in these sorts of culturally assertive interventions for a different reason: to provoke a reaction from opposing politicians, putting them in a hopefully impossible position with some of their working-class voters.
That mentality was clearly at play when Pochin asked Starmer this week whether he would 'follow the lead of France, Denmark, Belgium and others, and ban the burka' – and Yusuf, before he resigned, seemed all too aware of it, writing on social media: 'I do think it's dumb for a party to ask the PM if they would do something the party itself wouldn't do'.
And for interventions that don't involve a public question to the Prime Minister – such as Farage's pronouncements in speeches and Q&As – Farage and his team know full well that their influence in the media is such that political opponents will be asked for a response.
The ideal scenario for Reform is for Keir Starmer, Kemi Badenoch, and their collective MPs to say, no, they do not agree with Reform's latest cultural pronouncement. The resulting clips, usually without the context of Reform's original comments, can look as if the politicians in question were going out of their way to, for example, support Lucy Connolly's imprisonment, or, in this week's case, for the normalisation of the burka.
Reform seem to think there is no risk in campaigning like this. They assume their core and prospective voters will not be offended by their own comments, but might be irritated watching opposing parties disagree. And, to be fair, you could see that Starmer did not want to engage on the burka this week, presumably for fear of looking like he was going out of his way to support it.
But this is another example of Reform being stuck in their own past. They still campaign like a little party, as if their primary objective was to get to 15 or 20 points in the polls, not to form a government. This week's intervention was a mistake, and not just because it cost them a competent chairman; it risked making the party look eccentric at best and sinister at worst.
On the specifics of the burka, the opinion research is hard to read, not least because voters are nervous talking about it. While there has been little recent polling, in 2017, a YouGov survey found that 48 per cent would support a burka ban while 42 per cent would oppose it. My very strong impression is that most voters would not like to see significant numbers of people wearing the burka, because of the physical barrier it places between the wearer and everyone else; it is obviously also something which has barely been seen in this country, even as multi-racial Britain grew post-war.
However, if they were asked to consider the implications of a legal ban, I suspect most voters would not want the state to get into the business of policing clothing, because they believe personal choice should be respected (yes, there is a debate about how much choice wearers have, but this will be lost on the majority of voters). Most voters would, in turn, be horrified to see women in burkas being physically barred from particular places, let alone arrested. While 'classical liberalism' in Britain is dying – and with it the belief in a small state – this would still cross a line for most people.
More broadly, this cultural intervention, and others like it, will only dissuade Reform's next set of target voters to back them. Given their objective is to form a government, they need to get to 35 points at least in the polls to give them a chance (they are currently probably just shy of 30 points). This means significantly expanding from their base of disaffected working-class voters (who will always be their most important) and going after people who only recently voted Tory or Labour.
The primary barrier, for these voters, is absolutely not that Reform is insufficiently Right-wing, or insufficiently patriotic, or culturally assertive. The primary barrier for them is whether or not Reform looks professional, mainstream (of sorts), and will focus on things that really matter and that other parties fail to engage on. This group of voters will not vote for a party which looks like a European populist party, or indeed the Trump administration.
A recent poll suggested Reform's lead over Labour had narrowed by a couple of points. You cannot make this assertion from one poll; polls move all the time. But there is no doubt Reform has had a bad couple of weeks. Firstly, their implausible mini policy package which promised massive spending paid for by cutting waste; and now a pointless row over the burka which appears to have cost them a chairman.
Their focus on cutting conventional immigration, changing asylum laws, stopping small boats, reducing the influence of woke and getting the police focused on real crime will appeal to most voters; and the other parties are struggling badly to answer these policy challenges. When it comes to winning over the public, they would be well advised to stay focused on these issues and leave the cultural commentary to others.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How Europe could go ‘Mega' by 2027
Poland's new president is a Trump-inspired nationalist. The government in the Netherlands has just been felled by an anti-migrant firebrand. Right-wing parties are already in government in Hungary and Italy, and in Berlin, the far-Right Alternative for Germany (AfD) is the main opposition after it was endorsed by JD Vance and Elon Musk in the February elections. As Europe begins a cycle of crucial elections over the next two and a half years, the radical insurgent Right has the momentum. By 2027, there could be eight nationalist prime ministers in the 27-member-strong European Union, which has already swung to the Right. Meanwhile, Donald Trump's White House is determined to 'Make Europe Great Again'. Allies in the right places could prove very useful to Mr Trump, who accuses the EU of trying to 'screw' the US on trade and through the regulation of American technology firms. If 2027 is the year Europe does indeed go 'Mega', there will be serious ramifications for EU policies on migration, Ukraine and net zero, as well as a push to assert national leadership over Brussels. Experts believe this week's win in Poland and ructions in the Netherlands will bolster the 'Mega' wing in Europe with proof of concept. 'I don't believe in domino effects, but I do believe in a demonstration effect,' said Pawel Zerka, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations think tank. In other words, people in other countries are aware of and influenced by politics elsewhere. 'The biggest demonstration effect is coming not from other European countries, but from the US,' he said. 'The election of Donald Trump gives a legitimacy boost and a confidence boost to plenty of the far-Right parties across Europe and their electorates.' Many of the parties had 'ever tighter links to the Maga movement' and 'practical support' to get better results, he said. Geert Wilders led his Party for Freedom (PVV) to the hard-Right's first-ever general election win in November 2023. But the 'Dutch Trump' was forced to sacrifice his dream of being prime minister in coalition talks after his shock victory on a platform of 'zero asylum'. This time, he would become prime minister, he told reporters in The Hague, as he vowed to once again defeat the establishment conservative and Left-wing parties in October. The shock-headed populist may struggle to repeat the trick, or to find willing coalition partners, after toppling the government for not backing his hardline migration plans. Current polls have him with a narrow lead of one percentage point over the Left-wing GroenLinks-PvdA. But Mr Wilders was enjoying highs of 50 per cent before forming a coalition government that struggled to implement its strictest ever asylum policy. He is banking on those numbers recovering, and White House officials have already made clear he has Mr Trump's backing. With enough vote share, he could form a new conservative coalition with the pro-business VVD, provided it also posts strong results. Tellingly, its leader has not yet ruled out a second alliance with Mr Wilders. Mr Trump hosted Karol Nawrocki at the White House before the Law and Justice-backed former historian won a knife-edge victory on June 1. The role of president is largely ceremonial in Poland, but it comes armed with the power of veto over new legislation. Law and Justice (PiS) won the popular vote (35.4 per cent), but fell short of a majority at the last general election in Poland. Donald Tusk, who won 30.7 per cent of the vote, cobbled together a large and unwieldy centrist coalition to take power. Since then, prime minister Tusk has sought to steer Poland back to the European mainstream. His reforms, including the liberalisation of some of Europe's strictest abortion laws, are set to be frustrated by Mr Nawrocki's vetoes. Mr Tusk has called for a vote of confidence on June 11 to shore up his restive coalition, which is trailing PiS in the polls. Even if that passes, it looks very unlikely his government will survive to the end of its term in 2027, and while it is unclear who the PiS's candidate could be in the next general election, a hard-Right prime minister is not unlikely. Businessman turned politician Andrej Babis is leading in the surveys – consistently polling about 30 per cent – ahead of October's general election in the Czech Republic. The last election saw him lose to a Conservative-Liberal coalition by just a handful of votes. Babis's party, ANO, obtained 27.13 per cent of the vote, while Spolu, which leads the coalition of the current government, won 27.79 per cent of the vote. If he scrapes together a few more votes, the populist will become prime minister for the second time. During his first spell in office, he donned a Trump-style red baseball cap. A Babis victory would mean that he, and potentially Mr Wilders, would join the highly influential European Council, which meets regularly in Brussels to give the EU institutions political direction. At present, the hard-Right have Italy's Giorgia Meloni and Hungary's Viktor Orban in the room, but their numbers could double by the end of the year to include Mr Babis and Mr Wilders. Mr Orban nailed his colours to Mr Trump's mast a long time ago and is a darling of American conservatives. The EU's longest-serving prime minister is looking to win a fifth consecutive term in office in elections in 2026. In 2022, his party obtained 54.13 per cent of the vote – the highest vote share obtained by any party in Hungary since the fall of Communism in 1989. His policies, such as laws insisting Hungary only legally recognises two genders, have drawn praise and emulation from Maga supporters. But he has angered Western EU member states by opposing sanctions on the Kremlin and banning gay pride marches. Mr Orban is currently the most vocal nationalist leader in calling for pan-European alliances of hard-Right parties to radically reform the EU. His party is in a European Parliament alliance with the parties led by Mr Wilders, Marine Le Pen, Ms Meloni's coalition partner Matteo Salvini, and Spain's Vox. Prime minister Ulf Kristersson's coalition is propped up by the hard-Right Sweden Democrats, which remains formally outside of government despite coming second in a 2022 election dominated by fears over immigration and crime. The far-Right nearly doubled their vote share between 2014 and 2022, from 12.86 per cent to 20.54 per cent, which is largely down to the Sweden Democrats. The Sweden Democrats have exerted considerable influence over the government and its agenda. The question is whether voters will give Jimmie Akesson enough of a mandate to finally bust the taboo that has so far kept a party partially founded by Nazi sympathisers from being formally in government. Giorgia Meloni has emerged as a genuine stateswoman since she took power in 2022, and experts believe her example of government has made the hard-Right in Europe more credible. She has kept her Right-wing coalition together, which is no easy task in Italy. She positioned herself as a mediator between the EU and Mr Trump while successfully spearheading a drive to get Brussels' tacit backing for offshore migrant detention camps. Thanks to her, the Italian hard-Right's vote share has risen from just 1.97 per cent in 2013 to 27.2 per cent in 2022, and she will be optimistic of another victory in 2027's general election. She has much in common politically with Mr Orban, but they are divided over Ukraine, which has split the European hard-Right. She shares a European political party with Poland's Law and Justice, which is hawkish on Russia and will be contesting the general election in 2027 if Mr Tusk's vote of confidence passes next week. Spain's conservatives won the popular vote – 33.1 per cent – in the last general election, but fell short of a majority. Their potential coalition allies, Vox, the far-Right and Trump allied nationalists, underperformed, obtaining just 12.4 per cent of the vote. That opened the door for socialist prime minister Pedro Sanchez to assemble an extremely broad coalition of the centre-Left, communists and Catalan and Basque separatists. Polarised Spain's culture wars have only got worse in the years since the 2023 election and the start of the divisive Mr Sanchez's second term. The pardoning of Catalan separatists and political discussions with former terrorists, as well as corruption allegations about his wife and allies, could cost him in 2027. Emmanuel Macron called snap parliamentary elections, effectively daring the French to hand over power to the hard-Right, after Marine Le Pen's National Rally defeated him in the European Parliament elections last summer. National Rally did not get a majority, after a group of different parties united to keep out the hard-Right. But Mr Macron's party lost its majority in the National Assembly and has been a lame duck domestically ever since. Head of the largest single party in France, Ms Le Pen is well positioned for presidential elections in 2027, in which Mr Macron cannot stand. But Ms Le Pen was banned from running for the presidency in March after being found guilty of embezzlement. It drew immediate comparisons to the 'lawfare' waged on Mr Trump, who offered his support. She is appealing, but her protege Jordan Bardella will run in her stead if necessary. Polls are showing that either could win against Gabriel Attal, a contender to succeed Mr Macron as candidate – if they were to run. Ms Le Pen would beat him 53 per cent to 47 per cent, Bardella by 52 per cent to 48 per cent. The question is whether the 'front republican' will once again emerge in the second round of the presidential elections to keep the National Rally from power. Or, as it did this week in Poland, fall just short. The election of a Eurosceptic leader to the presidency of France, the EU's most influential member state alongside Germany, would be a political earthquake that would shake Brussels to its core. Andre Krouwel, who teaches political science at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, said the populist parties in Europe were comparing notes as they plotted their routes to power. He said: 'They use the success and failure of other parties to learn from and use in campaigns. You see a lot of copying of strategies, such as victim playing or attacking so-called elites.' In general, traditional parties had an advantage in their experience and ability to govern, he added. Mr Wilders' decision to pull the plug on his coalition was an example that proved populists were 'good at saying things, not doing them.' The parties were also 'super-unstable' and given to infighting. For Prof Krouwel, the rise of the populist Right across Europe has its roots in economic anxiety as well as fears over immigration. 'There was always an expectation that your children will do better than you. You can't say that now,' he said, adding that Dutch children were staying home far longer because they can't afford to move out. 'We are all becoming southern Europe and that is an explanation for the populist surge,' he said. Maria Skora, visiting researcher at the European Policy Centre think tank in Brussels, said there were certain broad trends common to many EU countries where the hard Right was on the rise. There have been 15 years of difficulties, including the eurozone and migrant crises. The pandemic was followed by the war in Ukraine and the resulting cost of living crisis. That all contributed to the sense that traditional parties were not delivering. Meanwhile, parties like the AfD were extremely effective at using social media and digital campaigning. 'It's a digital revolution, as big a revolution as you know, radio back in the day,' Ms Skora said. 'I think this feeds into this tribalism and polarisation, which we see in more countries.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Illegal work arrests double in year as police target 'unscrupulous' employers
Arrests for illegal work have doubled in a year as police focus on "unscrupulous" employers who exploit undocumented migrants, the government says. Immigration officers arrested more than 6,400 people in the past year in raids at businesses across the UK, data released by the Home Office shows. It said the figure is 51% higher than the previous year. It did not provide numbers as to how many arrests led to charges, convictions or deportations. It said immigration enforcement officials had "intensified" their work to "tackle those abusing the UK immigration system and exploiting vulnerable people". Officers had visited more than 9,000 businesses - among them restaurants, nail bars and construction sites - to check paperwork and working conditions. Such businesses had often subjected migrants to "squalid conditions and illegal working hours" as well as below-minimum wages. The Home Office said there were a range of industries exploiting migrant workers. In one case in Surrey, officers arrested nine people at a caravan park who had been working as delivery drivers. At one one major operation in March, officers arrested 36 people at a building site in Belfast's Titanic Quarter. Some had breached visa conditions while others didn't have working rights. Immigration Enforcement director Eddy Montgomery said there were many cases where people travelling to the UK were "sold a lie by smuggling gangs that they will be able to live and work freely in the UK. "In reality, they often end up facing squalid living conditions, minimal pay and inhumane working hours," he said. Dame Angela Eagle, the minister for border security and asylum, said the government would "continue to root out unscrupulous employers and disrupt illegal workers who undermine our border security". The government said it had also returned nearly 30,000 people over the past year who did not have the right to be in the UK. It has said it is cracking down on illegal migration, setting out its plans in a White Paper to tighten work visas and those overstaying. It scrapped a special visa for care workers introduced during the pandemic, noting that this had been a pathway exploited by some. There was mixed reaction to the plans, with some business sectors decrying the restrictions on work visas, while some Conservative opponents said the reforms didn't go far enough to stop illegal migration. The most recent data shows that approximately 44,000 people have entered the UK illegally in the year to March 2025, more than 80% through small boat journeys.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
‘They are in shock': Indian students fear Trump has ended their American dream
For weeks, Subash Devatwal's phone has not stopped ringing. Some of the calls have been from distressed students, at other times it is their panicked parents, but all have the same question – is their dream of studying in the US still possible? Devatwal runs an education consultancy in Ahmedabad, the main city in the Indian state of Gujarat. It is one of thousands of such organisations that exist across the country, helping Indian students achieve what many consider to be the ultimate symbol of success: getting into an American university. It has long been a booming business for Devatwal. Families in India will often invest their entire life savings to send their children to study in the US and last year there were more than 330,000 Indians enrolled at American universities, more than any other foreign nationality, overtaking Chinese students in numbers for the first time in years. But this year the situation looks drastically different. As Donald Trump's administration has taken aim at international students – first implementing draconian screening measures over political views and then last week ordering all US embassies globally to indefinitely pause all student visa interviews – many Indian students and their families have been left in limbo. Trump's unilateral decision to block Harvard University from admitting international students, which was later blocked by the courts, also caused widespread panic and stoked fears that foreign students at other universities could get caught in the president's crosshairs. 'The students are in shock. Most of them spend several years preparing to study in the US,' said Devatwal. He said many of his clients were now hesitant to pursue a US degree, given the high levels of turmoil and uncertainty following the Trump administration's new policies. Indian students can expect to pay between $40,000 to $80,000 (£29,500 to £59,000) a year on tuition alone to study in the US. In previous years, Devatwal's organisation sent more than 100 students to American universities but this year he said the number had dropped to about 10. Instead, families were shifting their focus to the UK and other European countries. A recent analysis by the Hindu newspaper estimated a 28% drop in Indian students going to the US in 2025. 'Families contribute their savings, take out loans from banks and borrow from relatives, all in the hope that the student will secure a good job abroad, repay the debt, and build a promising future,' said Devatwal. 'In such uncertain circumstances, parents are understandably reluctant to let their children take such a risky path.' Brijesh Patel, 50, a textile trader in Surat, Gujarat, said he had been saving money for over a decade to make sure his son could go to a US university, including selling his wife's jewellery and borrowing money from relatives. 'Everyone in the family wanted our son to go to the US for his studies and make something good of his life,' said Patel. His 21-year-old son, who he asked not to be named for fear of retribution by the US authorities, had secured a place at two American universities for his master's degree and Patel had already paid 700,000 rupees (£6,000) to consultancies who helped with the applications. But amid the turmoil under Trump, Patel said his son was being advised not to even apply for his student visa, due to the uncertainty and high probability of rejection. 'We simply can't take that risk. If our son goes now and something goes wrong, we won't be able to save that kind of money again,' he said. However, Patel said he was not willing to give up on the family dream just yet. 'I am an optimist, and my son is willing to wait a year,' he said. 'We're hoping that things improve by then. It's not just my son who will be living the American dream, it's all of us: my wife, our relatives and our neighbours. I've struggled my whole life – I don't want my son to face the same struggles here in India.' The fear among prospective and current students was palpable. Several Indian students studying in the US declined to speak to the Guardian, fearing it could jeopardise their visas. In India, a student selected in December to be one of this year's Fulbright-Nehru doctoral fellows – a highly competitive scholarship that pays for the brightest students to study abroad at US universities as part of their PhD thesis – said the applications of their entire cohort had recently been demoted back to 'semi-finalists'. The student, who asked to remain anonymous over fears it would affect their application, said they had invitation letters from top Ivy League universities for the fellowship, which is considered one of the most prestigious scholarships in the US, but now everything was up in the air. 'We are supposed to start in October and our orientation was scheduled for May, all the flights and hotels were even booked, but then it all got cancelled. Now we've been informed all our applications are under review by the Trump administration,' said the student. They said it had caused 'huge panic and anxiety' among those accepted. 'I know a lot of people are going back through their social media, deleting things and doing a lot of self-censoring.' Piyush Bhartiya, a co-founder of the educational technology company AdmitKard, said many parents who had been set on sending their children to the US were rethinking their plans. He cited one example of a student who had been admitted to New York University for the coming year but was instead planning to go to the London School of Economics after the US visa interviews were paused. Bhartiya said Indian students primarily went to the US to study Stem subjects – science, technology, engineering and maths – and so the focus had shifted to other countries strong in these areas. 'Germany is the main country where students are shifting to for Stem subjects,' he said. 'Other countries like Ireland, France, the Netherlands, which are also gaining substantial interest in the students. At the undergraduate level, the Middle East has also seen a lot of gain in interest given parents feel that it is close by and safer and given the current political environment they may want their kids closer to the home.' Among the Indian students forced to abandon their plans is Nihar Gokhale, 36. He had a fully funded offer for a PhD at a private university in Massachusetts, but recently received a letter saying the funding was being withdrawn, as the university faced issues under the Trump administration. 'It was quite shocking. I spoke to people at the university, and they admitted it was an exceptional situation for them too,' said Gokhale. Without the funding, the US was financially 'out of the question' and he said he had an offer from the UK he now intended to take up. 'For at least the next three or four years, I'm not considering the US at all,' he said. • This article was amended on 4 June 2025 to correct a conversion error. An earlier version said that 700,000 rupees was £68,000 instead of saying £6,000.