Reform’s Lowe Blow

If you check the comments beneath any Reform UK tweet, you might notice that beloved MP Rupert Lowe has been banished. Conflict was bound to brew after Lowe surpassed Farage as Elon Musk’s favored leader of Reform. One source told the Telegraph, “As soon as Rupert’s speech got more applause than Nigel’s at conference, that was the end of him.” Adam Limb understood Richard Tice’s policy to tax renewable subsidies as a retaliation against Lowe, who owns a battery-storage company. But nobody came to blows until last week, when provocateur Harry Cole of the Sun presented quotes from Lowe’s interview with Andrew “Tory Boy” Pierce of the Mail, strip-mined of their context, to Farage as a challenge to his leadership. Farage responded, saying “We are not a protest party in any way at all”, and suggesting that Lowe may not be a Reform MP at the next election. In the ensuing hours, commentators added “complex” to Lowe’s comment that Farage has “messianic qualities” — putting words in Lowe’s mouth.

This culminated in a statement on 7th of March, co-signed by chairman Zia Yusuf and chief whip Lee Anderson MP, accusing Lowe of two counts of bullying female staff and two “threats of physical violence” against Yusuf.

These run contrary to character testimonies from a woman who worked with Rupert for decades, and Matt Le Tissier, who played for Southampton football club while Lowe was chairman. Lowe has, at length, attempted to refute these allegations on X: explaining that the allegations of bullying were not against him, but rather staff in his Parliamentary and constituency offices, and have been conflated in the statement as a pretext to withdraw the whip from him. One of the complainants has also clarified, via former employer and MP Andrew Bridgen, that Lowe was not the subject of her complaint. Clouding matters, Lowe claims to have been cooperating with the KC — who Lowe said expressed confusion as to why Reform would release a statement claiming otherwise. However, the BBC has since quoted the KC, saying “I have not expressed either ‘dismay’ or ‘shock’ at any time as to the process. Nor have I said ‘there is zero credible evidence against [Mr Lowe]’, let alone said this ‘repeatedly’.” However, Lowe continues to say the KC has been “chasing” for “credible evidence” against him — which has not been provided. The KC did not dispute Lowe’s quotes attributed to her, only his framing of them in his X posts. (Were anyone to misquote the KC, they could be held legally liable.) Lowe has vowed legal action, claiming the investigation “is a vindictive witch hunt, all because I asked awkward questions of Nigel.” He now alleges that people within Reform have been briefing journalists that he has dementia.

It should be noted that Lowe has never sought to usurp Nigel’s leadership. Nowhere in his Mail interview did he say Farage should abdicate. In fact, he has said many times, including in private, that “Nigel deserves to be Prime Minister” for his decades of campaigning for Brexit. Lowe, like many “critical friends” of Reform, has never been in doubt about wanting the party to win. He only questioned its strategy on how it wins, and what winning looks like after the election. Lowe reiterated the need for Reform to build a policy prospectus, appoint a shadow cabinet of spokespeople, and for Farage to better delegate in order to appoint his successor — since neither he nor Lowe are spring chickens. All reasonable requests, that media with vested interests in propping up the zombies of the Labour and Conservative parties contorted to drive a wedge between both men.

This circus couldn’t have rolled into town at a worse time: with Reform topping the polls, and President Trump signaling his disinterest in meeting with Kemi Badenoch during his state visit, intending to see Farage instead. It is ironic, or providential, that Reform’s civil war erupted on Ash Wednesday. The Lenten season commemorates Christ’s forty days in the desert, denying the Devil’s temptations of food, pride, and power. When promised all the kingdoms of the Earth and their splendor, Christ dismisses Satan, saying that God, and what   He deems good, is worth worshiping more than wealth and worldly status. Reform should realize that principles precede power. As former deputy leader Ben Habib pointed out, Rupert Lowe is sixty seven, independently wealthy, and donates his MP’s salary to a different charity each month (much like Donald Trump’s first term). Lowe’s political career hasn’t been marred by the extramarital sexual escapades or illicit drug habits of other politicians. For Lowe, fixing the country is the goal, rather than his personal empowerment or enrichment. Principles matter more than power.

The same seems not to be the case for some surrounding Farage — eager to gain fame, free pints, or power by proximity. Fears from anonymous sources that Lowe has been “captured by the online radical Right” seem chiefly concerned with how public perception may waylay their path to power. They mainly concern the optics of supporting “mass deportations and other preoccupations”. But mass deportations are not the domain of a fringe far right: they are what Reform’s own members and voters expect the party to deliver. I suggested Reform should support the policy at their annual conference, to the applause of a room of their members. Mass deportations of illegal immigrants have majority public support in the US, which is why Donald Trump won the popular vote by promising them. Likewise, 58% of British voters support the same deportation policy for illegal migrants in the UK. Mass deportations are a vote winner, and where the public on both sides of the Atlantic already are. Lowe has been relentless in his support for them. Farage suggested a change of heart in a recent video: “deporting those who come here illegally [has] just won an election for Trump in America. We may be a different country [but] the principles are exactly the same.” Britain has at least 1.2 million illegal immigrants currently in the country. At least 1-in-13 in London is an illegal immigrant. What would removing them all, enforcing a single-tier rule of law, constitute if not a mass deportation? For nameless sources speaking to the Telegraph to now rule it out on Farage’s behalf is alarming.

On the notion that Lowe has been radicalized by his X feed: yes, audience capture is a real phenomenon. However, what Lowe has done these last few months is reassure the consternated base after Farage dismissed concerns about demographic change, repeatedly ruled out mass deportations for illegal immigrants, and said “if we politically alienate the whole of Islam, we will lose”. He has prevented vital energy from being wasted by core supporters wandering off down noxious cul-de-sacs by joining BNP successor parties. But it no longer looks like Lowe is calming the membership anytime Farage makes an off-the-cuff remark that suggests a softening of policy. Before, it was suggested that Reform had a split messaging strategy: with Farage carrying the ming vase across the finish line, while Lowe told the base what Reform will do when they win with plausible deniability for the leadership. Now, it seems like Lowe was breaking with a purposeful leftward-drift by the party leadership, and has been punished for giving the base permission to voice their existing, reasonable concerns about immigration.

Lowe’s exile has also followed a series of questionable hires by Reform HQ. There are some competent people working there, who I’ve met, spoken with, and like very much (and who no doubt will hate this article). But whose bright idea was it to hire the likes of Chris Bruni-Lowe, who botched Farage’s bid to become a UKIP MP in South Thanet? Other underlings who wasted no time throwing Lowe under the Brexit Bus were regional organizer Mark Simpson, Richard Tice’s social media staff-member Matt Stevens, and man whose surname is an anagram Nicholas Lissack. While Stevens works for Tice, Lissack is employed as a researcher by his wife Isabel Oakeshott — the ostensibly-independent journalist, dispatched as a hatchetwoman anytime Reform wants to cut someone loose. This explains why Lissack has been interviewed as an “influencer” representing Reform, despite having no organic appeal, and gaining most of his followers with the promise of possessing salacious stories about Keir Starmer which never materialised. While the media confected a controversy from Rupert’s Mail interview, Oakeshott told Talk viewers “It’s really sweet, isn’t it? Poor little Rupert—he is quite new to politics. This is what happens to amateurs”, with a knowing smile. (Curiously, Oakeshott is not persona non grata at Reform — despite her being widely disliked, distrusted, and having already written in support of the “mass deportations” deemed beyond the pale.)

That same day, someone within Reform reported Lowe to the Metropolitan Police for allegedly making two “threats” to Zia Yusuf. This was conspicuously absent from Farage’s statement in the Telegraph, justifying the withdrawal of the whip from Lowe. Given Yusuf is shadowed by bodyguards at all times, and it took him almost four months (13 December – 6 March) to make the criminal complaint, we can question how imminent and credible these “threats” were. Another accusation quickly followed, of Lowe “manhandling” Labour minister Mike Kane in the Commons — causing Tice and Sergeant at Arms Ugbana Oyet to intervene. Lowe was concerned that an unsecure ship with hundreds of tons of explosive ammonium nitrate was docked in his constituency. I would like to remind everyone that England has a tradition of men dueling in order to resolve disputes. These stories about Lowe getting cross because a possible bomb was floating off the coast of Great Yarmouth come off as histrionics. There is also hypocrisy, given Lee Anderson was ordered to apologize for breaching Parliament’s bullying and harassment policy after twice swearing at a security officer in November, 2024. The whole thing is a farce; but Reform have made a rod for their own back with this double-standard.

But even if Yusuf had called the police on Lowe in December, doing so for some surly words shows that he does not understand the anti-Woke appetite of Reform’s base. How can they criticize Keir Starmer for his Stalinist persecution of social media critics now? It would always look weak, and like a malicious attempt to oust one of few rivals to inherit Farage’s throne. I don’t know Yusuf — though the willingness of many to give him the benefit of the doubt will have diminished. But it really does look like he purchased chairmanship of the country’s most popular political party for a few hundred-thousand, and set about purging it of its most popular loyalists. To what end? We don’t know.

What we can see clearly is that Reform is fracturing into factions, all of which are loyal to a man they think should be leading in Nigel’s stead. As I warned in a previous piece for The Critic, which Tice called “delusional garbage”:

“Far from being the presumptive king of the British right, Farage looks more and more like Lear: alone in the wilderness, while his offspring squabble over who gets to inherit the crown. …. If he doesn’t exert authority, specifically on the issues his supporters look to him to address, then we will lose another five years to the Lib-Lab-Con consensus.”

This is what I was warning about: a predictable falling-out with potential to derail the party. I hate that my prediction is being proven true.

This incompetence and unprofessionalism look indistinguishable from active sabotage; hence why some staunch Reform supporters are quietly worried about “Tory plants” taking root within the party. Such stitch-ups aren’t beneath the creatures of SW1 — just ask Liz Truss. But regardless of cock-up or conspiracy: Reform’s modus operandi will be moot if they render permanent the demographic revolutions of Boris and Blair. Their path to victory will be a winding road of “Et tu?” betrayals if the party’s casus belli of political revolution and radical immigration reform is forgotten. For what profit Farage if he gains 10 Downing Street, but betrays his cause in the process?

Another potential disaster looms, with the prospect of Boris Johnson emerging from a Terminator time-sphere by hijacking the GBPAC as a conduit for his comeback. Though his name should be mud, there are enough Conservatives who would substitute Boris in for a flailing Kemi Badenoch; and enough voters still fond of his bumbling fool act to regain lost ground in the polls. The Ukraine war is drawing to a negotiated close, and Keir Starmer decided to don his lab-coat and continue the “one-nation experiment in open borders” he blamed on Johnson’s government. Circumstances are allowing for Boris to reach for the crown in the gutter and pop it on his scruffy mop again. Farage already regrets standing down Brexit party MEPs in order to benefit Boris Johnson in 2019. Reform should beware that their infighting now doesn’t reward Johnson for his betrayal again.

How should Reform proceed? Rupert Lowe will be an independent MP, and Reform’s existing leadership are likely to let him back in. Richard Tice told GB News that even if the investigation clears Lowe of wrongdoing, “We want team players … the whip has been withdrawn, and that should be the assumption.” Another Farage source said to the Telegraph “he only falls out with people who are s***” — which speaks volumes about how little a loss they think Lowe would be.

As Lowe has proven, he’s not the type to suffer an exile in silence. Ben Habib will also remain a stone in the party’s shoe until he is listened to. It would take an act of contrition — like dismissing Zia Yusuf for his unprofessionalism, reinstating Rupert Lowe with the party whip, and embracing Ben Habib as party chairman, for Reform to mend bridges with its irate base. But the weekend’s statements and “anonymous sources” makes this look unlikely. Instead, a new party is likely to rise, and accommodate the think-tanks, media personalities, and other talent Reform has thus far left on the table. Perhaps they might reclaim the Brexit Party name, since it has fallen out of Farage’s ownership and back into Catherine Blaiklock’s possession. It might not overtake Reform in the polls, but it will further split the vote.

The danger, as acid-tongued analysts at J’accuse observed last week, is in Reform recreating the pre-2010 landscape. UKIP was unable to get its act together, and the BNP were busy making immigration restriction radioactive with legitimate neo-Nazi sympathies, which let Cameron win the election with a Lib Dem coalition. This civil war will put power out of reach for everyone on the national populist side for another election cycle if it continues.

Whether a pressure-group party is formed and folded in later, or Farage comes to his senses and cleans his house of saboteurs, both matter less than sorting this mess. If this crisis is not resolved, Reform will spend a long time wandering in the political desert — time that the country does not have.