Friday, July 17, 2026
Reform hypocrisy on 'hurty words'
He talks about his own experience as the son of a former cabinet minister and the protection officers who dominated his formative years, with emergency buttons everywhere and discusses the response of Reform politicians in particular, who, rightly or wrongly, believe that they are all targets and that nobody cares:
Frightened people say foolish things but it’s hard not to notice how closely Reform UK’s response to Widdecombe’s death has matched its broader political messaging. “It’s as though someone in the establishment wants us dead,” said Richard Tice of the authorities’ failure, thus far, to hand out bodyguards. Obviously I haven’t phoned the establishment to check but this strikes me as grandiose. What, all of you? Not just the boss? Even if Britain functioned like Russia, I’m not sure they’d think it worth the bother. What’s more, it appears Nigel Farage was offered protection equal to Kemi Badenoch and turned it down. That doesn’t mean Tice is wrong to be worried. Of course he isn’t. If Widdecombe was at risk, he could be too. Maniacs follow no rules.
So what to do about them? Yesterday, Reform’s party chairman, Zia Yusuf, demanded round-the-clock protection for all 650 MPs. Aside from the expense, the obvious flaw here is that this wouldn’t have helped Widdecombe, who wasn’t one, any more than it would Yusuf himself, who isn’t either. It also only deals with a symptom of the real problem. Because if we really do now live in a country where every MP requires the sort of protection once needed by a small handful of cabinet ministers, then surely that’s the bit to fix.
Here, though, Reform is on tricky ground. Yesterday Yusuf also hit out at rival politicians for “equating us to murderous regimes that butchered tens of millions of people”, on the basis that it might incite violence. I agree with him. I’m not sure he agrees with himself.
Reform, remember, is also the party that put Lucy Connolly on stage, introducing her as “Britain’s favourite political prisoner” after she called for asylum hotels to be firebombed. For two years they led, with sneers, the argument that mere “hurty words” hurt nobody. Meanwhile, Farage has accused Richard Hermer, the attorney-general, of “hating our history and our country” and accused plenty more of plenty more. This very week, Yusuf himself, who seems to be growing increasingly wild, hit back at the former Tory MP Harvey Proctor — who mildly chided Farage for politicising Widdecombe’s death — by publicly denouncing him as “depraved” for a historic gay sex offence that today wouldn’t be illegal. He is also still telling his followers that the Tories “destroyed Britain” and that Andy Burnham is about to destroy it even more. And on, and on.
Either this matters, or it doesn’t. Either maniacs are inspired by incendiary language or they are not. Personally, I think the link is diffuse, but I also think it pretty damn obvious that the more violent and condemnatory our discourse, the more likely it becomes that various maniacs will find focus for their mania.
A week ago, Reform would have called me a snowflake for that. Should their own children come to find themselves living in houses full of buttons they mustn’t press, I wonder if they’ll ever admit, even if only to themselves, that they got this one wrong.
He has a point. Reform politicians have been at the forefront of using this sort of language to demonise people and to encourage people to take matters into their own hands. They say they are victims of establishment hatred, but they are perpetrators as well.
Thursday, July 16, 2026
Has the Chancellor set the tone for a Burnham administration?
The paper adds that reflecting on her two years in the Treasury, Chancellor Reeves urged Britain to be "much bolder" and go "much further" in pursuing closer ties with the bloc:
Ms Reeves also defended her record, stating the economy had "beaten the odds" under her stewardship and she had proven her credibility in "every decision" since Labour was elected.
She concluded by urging incoming prime minister Andy Burnham to balance "radical change" with economic credibility, a mission she said had defined the Labour government and "I know it will remain the mission of the next."
In a speech at Mansion House, Ms Reeves said: “This government has shown that change, indeed radical change, is possible, and the record of the last two years makes clear that governments can achieve that change only when they combine radicalism with credibility.
“I had to earn that credibility in opposition, and I have proven it in government in every action that I have taken as Chancellor.”
Ms Reeves, who has long been a vocal proponent of deepening post-Brexit ties with Brussels, also said the prize of a stronger relationship with the trading bloc would be “immense”.
She called for a UK-EU summit, which was due this month but thrown into doubt after Sir Keir Starmer announced his resignation, to be rescheduled “as soon as possible” to finalise plans for a youth mobility scheme and other agreements on agrifoods and emissions.
Ms Reeves said: “In the age of insecurity in which we live, the economic strength of our country rests on strategic alliances, and no alliance is more important to us than our relationship with the European Union.
“I think that we need to be much bolder and go much further moving towards a trusted economic and security partnership, where the default is the UK is included not excluded, recognising that in the majority of cases, that will be the approach with the greatest benefits for Britain.”
It comes after a period of strained UK-US relations, which deteriorated after Sir Keir Starmer ruled out British involvement in the Iran war.
The future of our relations with the EU are absolutely crucial if we are to revive our economy and benefit from sustained growth. The Rachel Reeves may not retain her job under a Burnham administration but she has set a challenge for her successor and the new Prime Minister that must be responded to positively.
Wednesday, July 15, 2026
Reform adopt the Trump agenda on elections
Reform haven't gone that far yet, though they are not in a position to implement those sort of changes, but an amendment to the elections bill by their MPs certainly seems to be of the same ilk.
Byline Times portrays this amendement as seeking to prevent candidates from using the Irish language, Scottish Gaelic and Cornish on election leaflets, but of course any provision that restricts official literature to just English and Welsh text also undermines attempts to communicate with ethnic minorities in their own language as well, a group that is already having its voting rights affected by the requirement to present ID at polling stations.
The website says that the Reform-backed amendment would mean candidates who use languages that are not English and Welsh would face prison time. It would also impact on the Good Friday Agreement, but that has never been a problem for Reform UK:
New Clause 107 to the Representation of the People Bill – tabled by Reform UK’s deputy leader Richard Tice and co-signed by every sitting Reform MP (including Lee Anderson, Robert Jenrick and Suella Braverman) – would require all election publications material to be “in the English language or the Welsh language” only.
Publishing campaign material in any other language would become a criminal offence – punishable on summary conviction by up to six months’ imprisonment and/or a fine, and becoming an illegal practice for candidates, agents and parties.
The penalties are drafted to apply across the UK – including in Northern Ireland, where the Irish language and Ulster-Scots are protected in law and under the Good Friday Agreement designed to end the decades-long civil war.
The ban on languages other than English or Welsh would appear to criminalise election material published in Irish, used in parts of Northern Ireland, and Scottish Gaelic – including the bilingual leaflets routinely used in constituencies such as Na h-Eileanan an Iar – while exempting Welsh.
Five of six Cornish MPs (four Labour and one Lib Dem) have signed a joint statement at the bottom of this piece, exclusively published by Byline Times, condemning Reform’s proposals.
And the Cornish nationalist party Mebyon Kernow says it is “unbelievable” that MPs from Reform UK have tabled the amendment to the Representation of the People Bill in the House of Commons.
The Scottish National Party has also come out strongly against the proposals. SNP MSP for the Highlands and Islands Maree Todd said: “This despicable anti-Scottish amendment reveals exactly what Reform really thinks of Scotland – and would threaten anyone publishing election materials in Scots or Gaelic with up to six months in prison.
“It’s not even as if this amendment was introduced by one rogue MP – it was tabled by Reform’s Deputy Leader, and co-signed by a number of their MPs.
“Reform must now do the right thing – apologise to the people of Scotland for attempting to criminalise election materials written in the Scottish languages, and immediately withdraw this outrageous amendment.”
An SNP source said “plenty of our election material would fall foul of this – lots of SNP campaign literature, especially in the Western Isles, features Gaelic, even if the materials are not written exclusively in the language, though some are.”
Lots of SNP literature also uses Scots words and phrases, with Scots identified as a distinct language under the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages. The UK ratified the charter in 2001.
Since there is often overlap, Reform would then presumably have to increase funding for police to identify what they deemed English versus what was Scots.
The SNP has previously offered Gaelic translations of party manifestos, something which would likely be illegal under Reform’s amendment.
Sophia Smith Galer, a language expert and author of How to Kill a Language, told Byline Times the move was “plainly discriminatory.”
“It’s discriminatory not only to the other indigenous languages of the UK affected by this — the ones that aren’t English and Welsh — but also to individuals who could be publishing political literature in any of the migrant languages that also have a home here.”
She added that Reform UK wants to “frame languages as a problem, and as part of a wider problem — multiculturalism.”
“This is part of a broader vilification of languages other than English.”
Britain is a signatory to the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. Smith Galer said it was the defining “instrument we have that protects and promotes language diversity, and minority languages especially… They would take a very dim view of this too.”
A law like this would be “unique in Western Europe,” the linguistics journalist noted. “It’s not something any of our peers has done.”
“What’s funny is that, to police this, you’d probably need multilingual policing. You’d actually require language skills to enforce it. I don’t know if Reform were planning on creating multilingual jobs — I wouldn’t recommend this as the way to go about it — but that’s accidentally what they’ve created.”
This is part of Reform's war on multicultural Britain, an attempt to turn the clock back to an imagined ideal of an all-white, English-speaking UK that never actually existed. Their amendment doesn't just expose their disdain for the country they are meant to represent, but also their ignorance of history and British culture.
Byline Times portrays this amendement as seeking to prevent candidates from using the Irish language, Scottish Gaelic and Cornish on election leaflets, but of course any provision that restricts official literature to just English and Welsh text also undermines attempts to communicate with ethnic minorities in their own language as well, a group that is already having its voting rights affected by the requirement to present ID at polling stations.
The website says that the Reform-backed amendment would mean candidates who use languages that are not English and Welsh would face prison time. It would also impact on the Good Friday Agreement, but that has never been a problem for Reform UK:
New Clause 107 to the Representation of the People Bill – tabled by Reform UK’s deputy leader Richard Tice and co-signed by every sitting Reform MP (including Lee Anderson, Robert Jenrick and Suella Braverman) – would require all election publications material to be “in the English language or the Welsh language” only.
Publishing campaign material in any other language would become a criminal offence – punishable on summary conviction by up to six months’ imprisonment and/or a fine, and becoming an illegal practice for candidates, agents and parties.
The penalties are drafted to apply across the UK – including in Northern Ireland, where the Irish language and Ulster-Scots are protected in law and under the Good Friday Agreement designed to end the decades-long civil war.
The ban on languages other than English or Welsh would appear to criminalise election material published in Irish, used in parts of Northern Ireland, and Scottish Gaelic – including the bilingual leaflets routinely used in constituencies such as Na h-Eileanan an Iar – while exempting Welsh.
Five of six Cornish MPs (four Labour and one Lib Dem) have signed a joint statement at the bottom of this piece, exclusively published by Byline Times, condemning Reform’s proposals.
And the Cornish nationalist party Mebyon Kernow says it is “unbelievable” that MPs from Reform UK have tabled the amendment to the Representation of the People Bill in the House of Commons.
The Scottish National Party has also come out strongly against the proposals. SNP MSP for the Highlands and Islands Maree Todd said: “This despicable anti-Scottish amendment reveals exactly what Reform really thinks of Scotland – and would threaten anyone publishing election materials in Scots or Gaelic with up to six months in prison.
“It’s not even as if this amendment was introduced by one rogue MP – it was tabled by Reform’s Deputy Leader, and co-signed by a number of their MPs.
“Reform must now do the right thing – apologise to the people of Scotland for attempting to criminalise election materials written in the Scottish languages, and immediately withdraw this outrageous amendment.”
An SNP source said “plenty of our election material would fall foul of this – lots of SNP campaign literature, especially in the Western Isles, features Gaelic, even if the materials are not written exclusively in the language, though some are.”
Lots of SNP literature also uses Scots words and phrases, with Scots identified as a distinct language under the European Charter for Regional and Minority Languages. The UK ratified the charter in 2001.
Since there is often overlap, Reform would then presumably have to increase funding for police to identify what they deemed English versus what was Scots.
The SNP has previously offered Gaelic translations of party manifestos, something which would likely be illegal under Reform’s amendment.
Sophia Smith Galer, a language expert and author of How to Kill a Language, told Byline Times the move was “plainly discriminatory.”
“It’s discriminatory not only to the other indigenous languages of the UK affected by this — the ones that aren’t English and Welsh — but also to individuals who could be publishing political literature in any of the migrant languages that also have a home here.”
She added that Reform UK wants to “frame languages as a problem, and as part of a wider problem — multiculturalism.”
“This is part of a broader vilification of languages other than English.”
Britain is a signatory to the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. Smith Galer said it was the defining “instrument we have that protects and promotes language diversity, and minority languages especially… They would take a very dim view of this too.”
A law like this would be “unique in Western Europe,” the linguistics journalist noted. “It’s not something any of our peers has done.”
“What’s funny is that, to police this, you’d probably need multilingual policing. You’d actually require language skills to enforce it. I don’t know if Reform were planning on creating multilingual jobs — I wouldn’t recommend this as the way to go about it — but that’s accidentally what they’ve created.”
This is part of Reform's war on multicultural Britain, an attempt to turn the clock back to an imagined ideal of an all-white, English-speaking UK that never actually existed. Their amendment doesn't just expose their disdain for the country they are meant to represent, but also their ignorance of history and British culture.
Tuesday, July 14, 2026
Are Plaid Cymru serious about government?
The news site says that at a meeting of the British Irish Council on Guernsey on Friday, Plaid Cymru's First Minister Rhun ap Iorwerth said it was "Labour's call" and the proposal was "the offer" because ministers were working under tight financial constraints. But is that good enough from a party that has taken on the responsibiity of government?
The difference between the two parties lies with a single issue, with Plaid Cymru having pitched an extra £80m over two years for pupils with additional learning needs, but Labour holding out for £100m in this supplementary budget alone:
Labour's finance spokesperson Huw Thomas said the party would oppose the budget "as it stands".
Ap Iorwerth told BBC Wales that Labour should "reflect on why they would want to disappoint parents and local authorities... when there was such a comprehensive package on the table".
He added: "It's their call now."
Asked if he would have to go back to Labour with an improved offer, he said: "We have this offer on the table, which is 10 times more than Labour was going to spend on additional learning needs.
"We are ready to move forward with this."
Ap Iorwerth said that his government had pushed the boundaries and were working in a very tight constraint.
In response Huw Thomas said the offer was not enough.
"As it stands we will be opposing it now," he said.
He added: "There are certain things that happen if the supplementary budget isn't passed, but we'll be available to come back and vote for it the following week if that's what Plaid wants to do, if they meet our demands."
This is the first big test for the new minority government and they appear to be failing it badly, choosing instead an oppositional war of words rather than taking responsibility and going back to the negotiating table.
Labour and those other parties who are supporting headteachers and local councils on the issue of ALN funding have a valid case, but more importantly they have the luxury of holding out until they get what they want or something close to it.
Ministers do not have that luxury. The vote on the supplementary budget could be a painful wake-up call for Plaid Cymru.
Monday, July 13, 2026
Binface: the back story
The paper says that the likelihood is that when the residents of Clacton come to cast their votes in the newly announced by-election later this summer, they will have a choice between two main candidates: a man with a habit of spouting (what is, to some) total rubbish and… a sentient bin.
This is because, in a rare show of unity, the major parties have refused to put forward candidates to fight in Clacton. Labour and the Tories alike have disdained Farage’s decision, with Kemi Badenoch describing the by-election as “fake” and Keir Starmer calling it “a desperate political stunt”.
This means that Farage’s only challenger appears to be Count Binface, the intergalactic rubbish basket-wearing alter ego of comedian Jon Harvey, who, over the course of the past decade, has become a strange fixture of British politics, sneaking into the frame of almost every big election. But who is this enigmatic alien?
The paper says that Harvey studied Classics at Oxford before embarking on a writing career, which has seen him work on TV shows such as Have I Got News for You, The Revolution Will Be Televised and Armando Iannucci’s The Thick of It, which surely allowed him to hone his appreciation for the topsy-turvy weirdness of Westminster:
His interest in comedy and politics, he has previously revealed, was fostered by his older brother Dan during a childhood that was often turbulent, Harvey explained in a powerful piece for The Times in 2024. Their dad was an alcoholic, and he wrote, “we suffered it as a secret shame and it burnt us”; the brothers got through it by “wrap[ping] ourselves in a comfort blanket of shared passions”, laughing at old episodes of Blackadder.
In 2015, Dan died unexpectedly at the age of 43 and was posthumously diagnosed with diabetes. Since then, Harvey has admitted, he has struggled with the sense of guilt that so often plagues the suddenly bereaved. “In low moments, my heart thumps with failure. The thought that I could have done something else,” he told The Times. “That I should have tried harder.”
His strange side hustle as a joke candidate, he reckons, emerged as an “admittedly eccentric” means to keep Dan’s spirit alive and “to help his joy continue to radiate”. His first foray into politics was under the guise of Lord Buckethead, a creation inspired by a character from the sci-fi parody Gremloids, a 1984 movie that aimed to spoof Star Wars; Buckethead was their low-budget version of Darth Vader.
Donning a tall black bucket on, erm, his head, Harvey contested the 2017 general election against then-PM Theresa May in her Maidenhead constituency; he earned 249 votes by promising “strong, not entirely stable leadership”.
When Buckethead’s political travails were covered in the media, however, Harvey became embroiled in a copyright row with the writer of Gremloids, and so decided to take on a new cosmic persona, giving himself a slight title bump-up in the process. Count Binface was born.
He went on to stand against Johnson (in 2019) and Sunak (in 2024), as well as taking part in the London mayoral elections twice, with his biggest success coming in 2021, when he earned more votes than far-right group Britain First’s candidate Nick Scanlon. His campaigns tend to be crowdfunded online, with any surplus going to the homelessness charity Shelter.
When he’s not dressing up as a trash can, Harvey lives in Sussex with his wife Sarah, an actor and voice artist, and their two children; in a recent feature for The Times, he revealed how he has been camping out in the living room since their youngest was born, to allow Sarah to peacefully co-sleep with the baby.
And even space aristocracy, it seems, are feeling the pinch of the cost of living crisis. “My wife and I are both freelancers, so our incomes can vary wildly and I’m the primary breadwinner, which brings pressures of its own, especially now I’m a father of two,” he wrote in the same paper earlier this week.
After Farage has spent so long attempting to turn political discourse into theatre, there’s a certain logic to the fact that he now seems about to be joined on that stage by a jester – especially one who might appeal to those who think that politics is, well, rubbish.
It's going to difficult for Farage to argue he is being victimised by the establishment when his chief opponent is an alien with a bin on his head.
Sunday, July 12, 2026
Convicted fraudster was introduced as Farage’s chief of staff
The paper says that others who have been closely involved in the party have also claimed Cottrell arranged the Land Rovers that ferried Reform’s newly elected MPs to parliament, and that he covered the cost of a fundraising lunch with potential donors before the national vote:
Questions about the role of Cottrell – who is a convicted fraudster – and the extent to which he has provided undeclared support for Farage have been building over the past week as the Reform leader comes under unprecedented pressure.
On Wednesday, the Guardian revealed that a loan from Cottrell to Reform’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, was highlighted by bankers in suspicious activity reports. SARs are a way to raise concerns with the National Crime Agency; they are not proof of wrongdoing but flags for further investigation.
Among other SARs about transactions involving Reform was one relating to a £1m donation from Cottrell’s mother, Fiona, to Britain Means Business, a fundraising organisation for the party. The Guardian understands bank staff were not satisfied that the funds had ultimately come from her.
The Times reported this week that Cottrell had given out a business card with his name on and an official email address for Farage and had provided security, accommodation and staffing for the Reform leader before the election.
Tony Mack, who was initially Reform’s candidate for the Essex constituency of Clacton in 2024, told the Guardian that Cottrell was introduced as Farage’s chief of staff during meetings.
“I remember thinking that it was an odd term to use for someone who was unelected at that point,” said Mack, a psychotherapist and charity worker.
Things really are starting to get interesting now.
Saturday, July 11, 2026
The largest abbey in Wales
The Abbey was established in 1129 AD when Richard I de Grenville, one of the Twelve Knights of Glamorgan, gave 8,000 acres of his estate in Glamorgan to Savigniac monks from western Normandy:
The first monks arrived in 1130. Following the merging of the Savigniac order into the Cistercian order in 1147, Neath Abbey also became a Cistercian house. The abbey was ravaged by the Welsh uprisings of the 13th century. During the dissolution of the monasteries by King Henry VIII of England the last abbot, Lleision ap Thomas, managed to buy time through payment of a large fine in 1536, but the abbey was dissolved in 1539. In letters to the Cistercian General Chapter, Lleision served as a spokesman for the Welsh abbeys.
At this time, the abbey was turned into a large estate, initially granted to Richard Williams, although by 1600 it was owned by Sir John Herbert, and had a substantial Tudor mansion occupying a part of the cloisters. The mansion itself was only habitable for 100 years or so, before being abandoned as the site became a scene of industry.
By 1730, some of the buildings were being used for copper smelting, and the rest were abandoned. In the late 18th century, an iron foundry was opened near the abbey ruins by a company owned by the Price, Fox and Tregelles families. The ruined walls of both the Abbey and later mansion were gradually engulfed in quantities of industrial waste. The ownership of the site passed to the Rice family, Barons Dynevor, and it was in the 1920s, under Walter FitzUryan Rice, 7th Baron Dynevor that a local group of amateur archaeologists began the process of uncovering the medieval ruins.
As the site says the site has also had some commercial uses in modern times:
A motorcycle speedway track was constructed in 1962 and the Neath Welsh Dragons rode for one year adjacent to the Abbey. The west side of the Abbey was so close to the banking that the Abbey ruins looked as though it formed part of the track.
The area adjacent to the ruins is used by a car retailer and a number of smaller businesses and workshops.
The site has been used to film several episodes of television series Doctor Who. The Time Lord (played by Matt Smith) and his companion Amy Pond (Karen Gillan) have filmed several times at the site, which was transformed into a complete structure.
The site was also used for shots during the filming of the BBC television series Merlin, for example the castle of the ancient kings where Arthur rediscovered the round table in Series 3 episode 13
The West Glamorgan Archive service currently holds the world-renowned Neath Abbey Ironworks collection, comprising around 8,000 engineering drawings dating from 1792 to 1882.
These ironworks were built by the Quaker firm of Fox and Company of Cornwall in 1792, finally closing in 1885. During its lifetime, the works produced stationary mining engines, railway locomotives, steam and iron sailing ships for customers, mostly in the United Kingdom but sometimes for British and foreign entrepreneurs based on the European continent and much further abroad, in Mexico and Australia for example.
Labels: lochist
Friday, July 10, 2026
Ex-Labour MP tells of being sidelined to enable Starmer parachutist
The news site says that in a statement posted on Facebook on Wednesday, the ex-Labour MP said he wanted to set the record straight “in case there remains any misunderstanding” about his departure from the party after more than 40 years of membership:
Mr Davies represented Swansea West from 2010 until 2024, winning four elections, and previously served as MP for Croydon Central.
He was suspended by Labour in June 2023 after allegations of inappropriate behaviour towards women were published anonymously online — allegations he denied, which did not involve criminal conduct, and which were never tested at a hearing.
Mr Davies says the suspension came a week before he was due to be confirmed as Labour’s Swansea West candidate for the 2024 general election.
In an interview with Nation.Cymru last month, he said the party’s handling of the case amounted to being put on “political death row”.
He says he waited 23 weeks to be told what the complaints against him were — against a six-week standard recommended by the party-commissioned Forde Report — and that no disciplinary hearing was convened in more than a year of suspension.
When the general election was called in May 2024, he says the party refused to hold a hearing in the two weeks before candidate nominations closed — meaning he remained suspended and could not stand as Labour’s candidate.
Mr Davies says he repeatedly asked for the hearing he believed would clear his name, and responded to the complaints within two weeks of finally receiving them.
He resigned from the party after the election, describing its complaints process as one he had “completely lost my trust and confidence” in.
Torsten Bell, now Pensions Minister, was selected as Labour’s Swansea West candidate and elected in July 2024.
The complaints process was overseen by the party’s then executive legal director, Alex Barros-Curtis — who was later selected as Labour’s candidate for the vacant Cardiff West seat, and elected in July 2024.
Mr Davies told Nation.Cymru it was “difficult not to conclude” that the objective of the process “was not to get to the truth of the allegation in an independent forum, but to ensure that I did not stand for re-election”.
In a statement, a Labour Party spokesperson said the party “assesses all complaints thoroughly in line with our rules and procedures”.
Although Davies' statement is inevitably self-serving, it still provides some insight into how the Labour Party operates and the way they create spaces for their favoured parachutists.
Thursday, July 09, 2026
National Crime Agency asked to look at Reform UK funding
The paper says that, separately to the undisclosed £5m gift provided to the Reform leader, Nigel Farage, by a cryptocurrency billionaire shortly before the 2024 general election being reported to the NCA, banking staff judged that transfers of funds between Richard Tice, the party’s deputy leader, a major donor, Fiona Cottrell, and the senior party figure and convicted fraudster George Cottrell, required further investigation:
Suspicious activity reports (SARs) raised by bankers were passed to the NCA for examination.
Tice, via lawyers, threatened to injunct the Guardian to stop it publishing these details.
Without responding to any of the questions put to him, Tice then appears to have shared the allegations contained in the Guardian’s requests for comment with the Telegraph, which wrote them up without credit or contact ahead of publication.
The disclosures have come from a Guardian investigation in which a number of finance industry sources have provided information they believe raises questions over the funding of Reform UK.
...
The Guardian understands finance industry figures have raised at least four SARs relating to concerns about transactions involving senior figures in Reform:
* One relates to a £1m donation made to Britain Means Business, a fundraising organisation for Reform UK, before the last general election. Half of the £1m was then transferred by Tice, as director of the company, to Reform UK. Renamed from Leave Means Leave, Britain Means Business is a company that is used to help fund Reform. The £1m seemingly came from the aristocrat and Reform UK donor Fiona Cottrell. In this instance, the Guardian understands bank staff were not satisfied that the funds had ultimately come from her. The NCA has sought help from a foreign partner agency to trace the original source of the funds.
* Two other SARs relate to a loan from George Cottrell to Tice. The loan was made shortly before Tice finalised a property purchase and made a party donation, and was not repaid until after those two transactions were completed, according to sources. George Cottrell is the son of Fiona Cottrell, and is a convicted fraudster, former deputy treasurer of Ukip and close associate of Farage.
* A fourth relates to the £5m gift from the Thailand-based businessman Christopher Harborne to Farage, which was first revealed by the Guardian in April.
Regulated individuals in some sectors, such as accountants, bankers, real estate agents and solicitors, have a legal obligation to submit SARs to the NCA if they have “knowledge or suspicion of money laundering”. There are rules designed to ensure that SARs are sufficiently detailed for the authorities to be able to investigate them.
SARs are not the same as crime reports or proof of wrongdoing, and are usually regarded as markers for law enforcement agencies to take a more rigorous look and potentially investigate.
The money behind Farage and Reform UK is under acute political and public scrutiny. He is being investigated by the parliamentary standards watchdog over the £5m gift, which Farage has variously described as being needed to pay for lifetime security, and also as a reward for “getting Brexit done”. On Tuesday, he resigned from his Clacton seat to trigger a byelection, in which he will stand. However, this move is likely to only pause, rather than close, the investigation and any potential reprimand.
The prime minister, Keir Starmer, and the Conservative leader, Kemi Badenoch, have led cross-party calls for Farage to “come clean” over his financial affairs.
The filing of the SARs raises questions about whether Electoral Commission rules and the MPs’ code of conduct are being adhered to by Reform, and whether the rules are fit for purpose if, as critics of Farage have suggested, Reform has blurred the boundaries of personal and political finance.
Farage may have resigned to fight a by-election to try and distract attention from these dealings, but they are not going away.
Wednesday, July 08, 2026
Other parties shouldn't play Farage's game
For some reason the Reform UK leader believes that his resignation is part of “sticking two fingers up at the establishment” which will prove that the public wanted him to stay on as an MP.
In fact, it looks more like a blatant attempt to avoid responsibility for his actions, including the failure to declare a £5m gift from the crypto billionaire Christopher Harborne and financial support from his friend and fraudster George Cottrell.
For some reason, Farage believes that the establishment is out to get him, which is ridiculous as there is nobody more establishment than him. How this will play out has to be seen, but already there is speculation that the Reform UK leader will not have things all his own way:
Farage won the seat with a majority of 8,400 in 2024 with the Conservatives coming second and Labour third.
However, he could face a wave of tactical voting against him if there were to be an alliance of progressive parties, and a concerted effort against him by the even further right Restore Britain, led by the former Reform MP Rupert Lowe.
Lowe has not said yet whether his party will fight the byelection, but he criticised Farage’s decision to lead a media circus to Clacton. “Farage has proven one thing today and one thing only – everything that he does is about one person,” he said.
The opposition parties have now indicated that they don't plan to fight the election, not wantng to legitimse the stunt. The Lib Dems have added that Farage is a “Temu Trump” who gave a “self-obsessed diatribe” and had done nothing for his constituents while lining his own pockets.
Of course, the government don't have to keep to Farage's timetable. Ed Davey has already suggested that Nigel Farage’s resignation should be blocked until the Standards Commissioner finishes investigating him so that the people of Clacton have the full facts.
For some reason, Farage believes that the establishment is out to get him, which is ridiculous as there is nobody more establishment than him. How this will play out has to be seen, but already there is speculation that the Reform UK leader will not have things all his own way:
Farage won the seat with a majority of 8,400 in 2024 with the Conservatives coming second and Labour third.
However, he could face a wave of tactical voting against him if there were to be an alliance of progressive parties, and a concerted effort against him by the even further right Restore Britain, led by the former Reform MP Rupert Lowe.
Lowe has not said yet whether his party will fight the byelection, but he criticised Farage’s decision to lead a media circus to Clacton. “Farage has proven one thing today and one thing only – everything that he does is about one person,” he said.
The opposition parties have now indicated that they don't plan to fight the election, not wantng to legitimse the stunt. The Lib Dems have added that Farage is a “Temu Trump” who gave a “self-obsessed diatribe” and had done nothing for his constituents while lining his own pockets.
Of course, the government don't have to keep to Farage's timetable. Ed Davey has already suggested that Nigel Farage’s resignation should be blocked until the Standards Commissioner finishes investigating him so that the people of Clacton have the full facts.
Let's do everything we can to foil Farage's plan and remind him that if he has broken the rules getting re-elected like this in no way wipes the slate clean.
