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.
The obvious problem with this is that people don’t go into politics so that the political establishment can hijack some of their ideas after they’ve proven popular enough to be a vote-winner, people ultimately go into politics because they want to implement their ideas themselves. Reform is not a charity but a political party and as such, it doesn’t seek covert influence but power. One can also argue that this is the proper way because the political establishment will likely switch back to its usual direction once the upstart competitor has been eliminated.
Reform is not a charity, and neither is it a political party given that it is a company owned by Nigel Farage Ltd and with one other director who is of immigrant background.
How this is organizationally set up is besides the point. It’s some kind of association of aspiring politicians and not an organization dedicated to work for the public benefit. It also seems to be an association about to fracture into irrelevance again quickly as members and supporters seem to be more keen on taking on each other instead of the supposed political enemy.
The party isn’t a credible political party, given its structure. The promise was that the structure would change: it did, but not for the better. In fact, it has made the divisions more divisive, and the leadership team, of two, even more schizophrenic.
Do they want English or Islamic Law in the country, given that they’ve gone soft on the R*pe G*ngs?
Here’s a glimpse behind the scenes:
https://x.com/Muskobian/status/1910459720852529178?t=3drkD8PuI0aiVz50DAo_ww&s=09
BBC 20 February 2025
”Nigel Farage has given up ownership of Reform UK, with the party saying it wants to give more control to its members.
Unlike most political parties, Reform was founded in 2018 as a private limited company, with Farage holding the majority of shares.
This is now being taken over by a newly registered business called Reform 2025 Ltd, according to Companies House filings, with Farage and his deputy Richard Tice no longer holding shares.”
I can’t find a company: Nigel Farage Ltd. Do you have its registration number perhaps?
Notice in that photo how they make Rupert stand behind the others, and he’s the only one carrying files and paperwork.
A Vote for Reform is a Vote for the Caliphate.
And while the LibLabConReform Uniparty is pretending to want to stop the Pakistani Muslim Gang Rapes of Thousands of British Children, after ignoring the atrocities for decades and denouncing Tommy Robinson, Nick Griffin, Paul Weston and countless other Patriots for trying to defend those children…
Rupert Lowe’s Rape Gang Inquiry, crowdfunded by the Public, has reached
£561,928
The Rape Gang Inquiry – a Politics crowdfunding project in London by Rupert Lowe
The author Tom Jones was unjust to dismiss James McMurdock as merely “also being there”, because MP McMurdock has impressed his constituents with his diligent attention to their local concerns, and active efforts to improve their lives.
And he won his seat from his own hard work.
Farage saw a poll showing Reform would win Clacton and suddenly ousted Tice as leader and whoever was due to stand for Reform in Clacton.
Very interesting! I did not know that, and after reading your comment, I tried to find out the name of the Reform candidate for Clacton removed by Nigel, but couldn’t find anything.
I have previously read several articles on local news sites from McMurdock’s area, in which ordinary local “working class” people praised him for intervening in their local difficulties and quietly doing his best to sort it all out for them.
I joined Reform pre-election, liked everything they were saying.
I left Reform a fortnight ago, because:
1. No commitment to detain/deport. In 4 years we’ll have 300K plus Islamic migrants.
2. Farage’s statement about not allowing migrants to stay used the future tense – see point 1. This is a red line.
3. U turn on the Rape Gang enquiry, why?
4. I’m still not clear about who legally ‘owns’ Reform. Is it Farage and Yusef, or its membership?
5. I don’t ‘hate’ Muslims, always got along well with those I’ve met. However, Zia Yusef being CEO, out of the blue, and eloquent as he is, is not acceptable.
6. Tommy Robinson is a rough diamond, but Farage could have been more supportive.
I believe Reform’s membership feels the same way, hopefully common sense prevails, but if not, Farage must go.
Maybe you need to form your own party where everything is 100% what you want and you can agree with yourself all the time.
It’s a valid argument, but we all have to decide where our red lines are. Accepting least-bad is what brought us 14 years of unconservative government from a party of Big Government Liberals pretending to be conservative.
Reform is a Nigel Farage company with an immigrant as chairman. There are no party members only subscribers who have the same level of influence as you do when you sign up the Sky TV.
https://order-order.com/2025/04/11/fresh-tensions-at-reform-hq-as-insiders-dump-on-zia-yusuf/
Yes, maybe those “insiders” don’t want to end up like Rupert Lowe, whose perfectly reasonable use of the English phrase “I’ll cut this short” at the end of his argument with Mohammed Yusuf, was transformed by the hard-of-hearing Yusuf into “I’ll cut your throat” or some such nonsense. He is mistakenly applying the cultural attitudes and traditions of his ancestral homeland of Pakistan to Britons, who have scarcely ever used, throughout their long history, that type of threat and action so common among Muslims around the world.
I joined a while ago as well; and might leave just over the Muzzie Chairman and the list you have above.
Is Reform serious that a Muzzie running their party is going to ‘reform’ the invasion?
Please. UKIP might be the only alternative.
Far be it from me to suggest that a Tory Councillor should not be giving lectures to Reform how to conduct themselves. Oh no.! That’s exactly what I’m going to suggest. In the end politics without power is just hot air. Reform has to appeal to a wider set of views than just the Right wing pitch-forkers (a group I share much with philosophically).
They are being given the enormous opportunity of winning the next GE by ‘not being Labour’ as Labour won the last one by ‘not being Tory’. This is not the time to get dragged into the n’th degree detail of policy. Every time Labour flounders, and they will do it a lot, is another step towards power.
British citizens are not as thick as you blithely assume.
We are not “Right Wing Pitch-forkers”.
We do not want to fall for yet another “Bait & Switch”,
with Nigel planning to step aside to hand the leadership to a Pakistani Muslim.
A Vote for Reform is a Vote for the Caliphate.
The article is written by a Tory whose party in my area has been complicit in cancelling our May elections because they are afraid of Reform giving them a kicking and showing up their leader Olukemi Adegoke. It is hard to consider them are being right of centre given the leadership and the presence in the party of a host of leftwing MPs. No doubt the presence of this mob is why when asked by Nana Akua a ‘yes – no’ question on GB News this morning about dropping Net Zero, the wibbling Tory droned on and on avoiding the question. Great work by the director to keep her in split screen as her expression of boredom with his answer was a joy to behold.
Reform’s problem can be summed up in two words – Nigel and Farage. His past record of failure with UKIP and Brexit parties is being continued with Reform. The TV news and legacy media love him as he makes for good coverage and copy but he is just as vacuous as another many consider a messiah – the lying oaf Johnson. Until recently I would have said he came without the lying but in his hissy fit with Rupert Lowe he has lied when he claims to have never fallen out with anyone.
At the moment, Farage’s importance is artificially inflated because he’s a big fish in a very small pond. Should Reform ever become more than a footnote of 2024 – 2029 history, he’ll necessarily become a lot less important because the party would need to have a lot more MPs than it presently has.
The present problem of Reform can be summed up in one word: Infighting.
NB: I personally can’t stand the guy and consider him a total fake. But he’s a Reform MP and because of this, the other Reform MPs – for as long as there are still any – ought to consider him a colleague they have to work with for now.
NO! The present problem of Reform can be summed up in two words:
Mohammed Yusuf.
Yes – Muslimophilia.
Farage screams that everyone is racist.
Time for him to go. No balls to do what needs doing.
No, Reform’s problem is not Nigel Farage.
It is Nigel’s “Bait & Switch” plan to win the election and then step aside as yet another “ENABLER”, to let a Pakistani Muslim Millionaire take over the Reform party, riding on Nigel’s popularity coat-tails to become Britain’s First Muslim Prime Minister, and later fly the Black Flag of Islam over the UK Parliament.
THAT is Reform’s problem.
If the party structure was what is normal for political parties in the UK, the party would reflect the views of the members, and the problems would start being resolved.
Does the author think the other parties are “serious”?
I’ve just noticed that the author is a member of a party that uses the name The Conservative Party, that ought to be done under the trade descriptions act. The party that brought you lockdowns, dangerous medication, mass immigration, high taxes, net zero and restrictions on freedom of speech, and an utter failure to roll back the huge growth of the state. Seriously?
‘Conservatives’ = Convict Criminal Party.
The Tories aren’t a Right-of-Centre-Party. They’re the Blue Branch of the left-of-centre Establishment’s Westminster Uni-Party.
ALL of the challenges this country is currently facing were either created or exacerbated by the Tory FAILURE to be a right-of-centre party implementing right-of-centre policies.