I am not a big fan of bro-ish life advice quotes. But two in particular have always stuck with me, from Draft Animals, an autobiography by ex-pro cyclist Phil Gaimon. They shed some light on the present challenges facing the UK’s two competing Right-of-centre parties, Reform and the Conservatives – my own party.
The autobiography of a moderately successful American cyclist, whose biggest result was second in General Classification and a stage win at the 2014 Tour de San Luis, may seem an unlikely source of insight into British Right-wing politics, but the lessons are strangely apposite.
The first applies to the Tories. After failing to prepare properly for a particularly difficult race, Gaimon is embarrassed by a disappointing result. His coach, however, welcomes the valuable lesson, telling him: “There’s no better workout than having someone kick your fucking teeth in.” That was certainly the Tories’ experience at the last election – now it will be a long hard slog to get back into voters’ good graces.
The second can be applied to Reform. While waiting to start a race where he is being scouted by the Garmin team for a professional contract – a major prize for any cyclist – Gaimon starts to find the pressure difficult to handle. When he’s told it’s time to head to the start, Gaimon admits that he can’t move: he is paralysed by the pressure. He only ends up moving after his coach tells him: “You don’t go to the start line because you’re ready. You go because it’s time.” Ready or not, nervous or otherwise, now is Reform’s moment to take the starting line.
Gaimon went on to win the race (having learnt the first lesson, he had prepared meticulously). Can we say the same of Reform?
For all the talk of Reform’s potential to replace the Conservatives, and of Farage as the real Leader of the Opposition – even potential next Prime Minister – the evidence so far seems scanty.
Initially, the party’s approach to Parliament was remarkably coherent for a small party. Nigel Farage was the public face, appearing on mainstream outlets in an attempt to carry the party’s message to the centre and soften their image. Ousted leader Richard Tice would continue to carry the banner in the burgeoning Right-wing media landscape. Rupert Lowe would become the Parliamentary engine, subjecting the opposition to death-by-a-thousand-FOI-cuts and generating countless headlines for the party along the way. Lee Anderson would be himself: a pugnacious Red Waller who provided a visible, vocal reminder to Red Wallers that Reform was for people like them. James McMurdock would also be there. As a division of labour amongst a party of five MPs (now four), it would make Adam Smith proud.
Still, as a way to provide a coherent political platform, it leaves much to be desired. So far, both Reform’s policy framework and messaging feels unfocused, undisciplined and at times downright clownish. Recently, Lee Anderson tweeted a photo of an unusually-cut bacon sandwich telling vegans to “look away now” and asking if he should add “brown or red” (sauce).
Without strategic direction, this’ idiocy becomes the focus – only made worse by the departure of Rupert Lowe, hitherto Reform’s most serious and policy-minded MP. It could be doing so much better.
After all, even numerically small parties are capable of great influence. In Denmark, the record of the Danish People’s Party (DPP) shows that with rigorous discipline, even a small party can achieve the mainstreaming of its policy platform. Despite never having led a government, it has managed to mainstream its immigration policies over the past two decades thanks to a disciplined focus on this critical issue.
From its inception in 1995, the DPP maintained a clear and unwavering narrative: that immigration, particularly from non-Western countries, was a cultural and economic burden on Denmark. It argued that unchecked immigration threatened the cohesion of Danish society and the sustainability of its generous welfare system, a source of national pride. This message was simple, emotionally resonant and repeated consistently across platforms – public speeches, media appearances and election campaigns. By focusing on this core theme, the DPP avoided diluting its stance with extraneous issues, ensuring its position remained simple and memorable.
This consistency made its narrative a reference point in public debate, pressuring mainstream parties to respond. Over time, the repetition normalised what were once fringe ideas, such as deporting asylum seekers to third countries or limiting citizenship access. It also forced a reaction from the centre-Left Social Democrats; by the mid-2010s, after losing voters to the DPP, the Social Democrats were forced to adopt an ‘if you can’t beat them, join them’ approach. They co-opted the Right’s rhetoric and policies, advocating a ‘zero asylum’ policy and externalising asylum processing (e.g. to Rwanda). This shift, cemented by the Social Democrat’s 2019 election victory, demonstrated how the Right’s relentless focus had redefined the political centre.
It ought to be easy to force Labour’s hand on this in the same way. For now, though, that seems like it would require a professionalism that is beyond Reform. We can only hope now that it starts getting more serious. Britain will be better, in the long term, for mainstreaming effective immigration controls. Let’s hope our Right-wing parties have the stamina to go through with it.
Tom Jones is a writer and Conservative councillor.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.