Panic at the enduring popularity of Nigel Farage’s Reform UK is laid bare in a warning from a New Labour strategist who claims Sir Keir Starmer’s party lacks a plan and is “caught in the headlights”. Sir Chris Powell, who advised Labour ahead of Tony Blair’s 1997 landslide, warns there is no plan in place to deal with the “existential threat” posed by Reform, which enjoys a double-digit lead over all rival parties in Politico’s poll of polls.
Sounding the alarm in the Left-leaning Guardian, he said: “We are at a very dangerous moment. We simply cannot afford to allow Nigel Farage’s Reform UK to have a free run and become established and entrenched as a credible potential government in the minds of disenchanted voters. The longer they go unchallenged, the more unthreatening and risk-free they will seem to voters.
“Just hoping that Reform and Farage implode, or that the Right-wing vote will somehow fracture, is potentially suicidal for our freedom and democracy.”
According to Politico, Reform is in first place in the polls (29%), ahead of the Conservatives on 18%, with Labour and the Greens tied on 16% and the Liberal Democrats on 13%.
Get the latest politics news – straight from our team in Westminster and more
Invalid email
You agree you are 18 or over. We use your sign-up to provide content in ways you’ve consented to and to improve our understanding of you. This may include adverts from us and third parties based on our knowledge of you. You can unsubscribe at any time. More Info.
Nigel Farage’s party goes into 2026 with a major lead over its rivals (Image: PA)
Pressing for “no-holds-barred thinking”, Sir Chris said Sir Keir “needs to fundamentally change the way he approaches voters and his way of interacting with them”, adding: “Voters are fed up, think nothing works – and some are simply angry and feel ignored.”
He called for Labour to take on Reform online with a “semi-autonomous digital narrative unit whose sole mission is to wage and win the daily war for attention”.
Pressing for action, he warned: “The current situation in the UK is a textbook case of an establishment party caught in the headlights as its populist opponent expertly reacts to voter pain and disenchantment. Relying on containment or a rational ‘hold-your-nose’ vote is a strategy that will eventually fail.
“Labour needs a comprehensive action plan, now. Time is a luxury it can’t afford.”
Lee Anderson says attacks on Reform UK are backfiring (Image: Getty)
Reform UK MP Lee Anderson responded to the call to arms, saying the “Lefties are petrified”.
He added: “The more smears and lies they throw at us, the stronger Reform UK gets. It’s backfiring big time.
“They simply can’t get their head around the fact that calling everyone they disagree with a racist or a fascist doesn’t work. Mr Powell and his ilk can bang on all they want, but the simple fact of the matter is that Reform’s surge is down to decades of betrayal by his Labour Party and the Conservatives.
“The British public are sick to death of being lectured by these out-of-touch elites who have destroyed this country, and they are voting in their droves for Reform to get Britain back on track.”
Panic Rises at Lack of Labour Plan to Tackle Nigel Farage and Reform UK
Political pressure is growing inside Labour as the party confronts a difficult question: how should it respond to Nigel Farage and the continuing challenge posed by Reform UK?
The debate has become more complicated in recent months. Reform is no longer simply a protest movement operating on the fringes of British politics. It has established itself as a major electoral force, while Farage remains one of the country’s most recognisable political figures. At the same time, Labour’s political position has changed significantly since Andy Burnham became prime minister.
The result is an increasingly complicated contest in which traditional assumptions about British politics no longer appear sufficient.
Recent polling illustrates the volatility. A More in Common poll reported on 23 September put Labour on 26%, the Conservatives on 23% and Reform UK on 22%. Reform’s figure represented one of its lowest levels in 18 months, following months of scrutiny surrounding the party’s finances and other controversies.
Yet another recent analysis highlighted the possibility that tactical voting could dramatically reshape the electoral picture. Research by Survation and 38 Degrees suggested Labour could benefit if progressive voters coordinated tactically to prevent Reform candidates from winning particular constituencies.
These conflicting signals help explain why the political debate is becoming so intense.
Labour faces a different Reform UK
For years, Labour’s traditional approach to challenging the populist right has involved a combination of policy responses, attacks on Conservative governments and attempts to win back voters who had moved towards Brexit-supporting parties.
Reform UK has complicated that formula.
Farage has positioned Reform around immigration, taxation, national sovereignty, public services and dissatisfaction with established political parties. At the party’s September conference, Reform presented a detailed programme for its proposed first 100 days in government and Farage said he would declare a national emergency on his first day as prime minister if the party won a majority.
That gives Labour a problem beyond simply criticising Farage.
The party has to decide whether to concentrate on Reform’s policies, its candidates, its funding arrangements, the record of its representatives, or the wider economic and social issues that have created an audience for the party.
Each approach carries different political consequences.
The problem with simply attacking Farage
Farage has repeatedly presented himself as an outsider challenging the political establishment.
That narrative can become stronger if established parties appear to focus primarily on attacking him personally.
The Reform leader has already used scrutiny of his financial affairs as part of a wider argument that political institutions are attempting to constrain him. In September, he compared investigations involving him with the scrutiny faced by Donald Trump, describing both figures as outsiders confronting “the system”. The Guardian reported that Farage was facing questions over a previously undeclared £5m gift and other financial support.
For Labour, the challenge is therefore to distinguish between legitimate scrutiny and political messaging.
If there are questions about donations, election law or parliamentary standards, those issues can be investigated through the appropriate institutions. But turning every investigation into a central political weapon could allow Reform to argue that the establishment is attempting to silence the party.
That is particularly important because Reform has already shown that attacks from established parties can become part of its political narrative.
Money and regulation have become central
One of Labour’s most direct confrontations with Reform concerns political donations.
In September, reports emerged concerning large cryptocurrency-linked donations to Reform. The Independent reported that Angela Rayner had indicated the government’s proposed Representation of the People Bill could apply retrospectively to donations received by the party. The debate centres on whether donations connected to foreign or crypto sources should be subject to tighter restrictions.
This creates a difficult political balance.
There is a legitimate public debate about whether wealthy individuals should be able to exercise disproportionate influence through political donations. At the same time, changing electoral rules retrospectively can raise questions about fairness, consistency and the treatment of political opponents.
Labour therefore needs to explain not only what restrictions it supports but also why those restrictions should apply consistently across the political system.
Otherwise, Reform can portray regulation as an attempt to disadvantage a competitor.
Reform is not standing still
Another reason the pressure on Labour is growing is that Reform itself is developing a more extensive political programme.
At its September conference, the party presented policies intended to demonstrate that it was preparing not merely to protest but to govern. ITV reported that Reform used the conference to outline its proposed first 100 days in office.
That puts pressure on Labour to provide its own answers.
If Labour’s response consists primarily of explaining why Farage should not be prime minister, it risks leaving voters to debate Reform’s policies without a comparable discussion about Labour’s alternatives.
A governing party has to offer more than an argument against its opponents. It has to explain what it intends to do about the issues that are driving voters towards those opponents.
Immigration is an obvious example.
Reform has made immigration one of the central themes of its political identity. Labour therefore faces a choice between directly challenging Reform’s proposals, offering different policies on migration and border control, or attempting to shift the political conversation towards other issues.
None of those strategies is straightforward.
Tactical voting changes the calculation
The emerging tactical-voting debate adds another layer.
The Survation and 38 Degrees research reported by the Guardian suggested that Labour could potentially benefit from progressive voters switching tactically in constituencies where Reform is competitive. The research also suggested that Reform’s electoral position could be affected substantially by tactical voting.
But tactical voting is not the same as a political strategy controlled by Labour.
Voters ultimately make their own decisions, and tactical voting can produce unpredictable local effects. Constituency-level contests can behave very differently from national polling.
That means Labour cannot simply assume that voters opposed to Reform will automatically return to Labour.
The party still has to persuade them.
Reform’s recent difficulties matter too
The current political situation is not one in which Reform is simply advancing without obstacles.
ITV reported earlier in September that the party had experienced a difficult summer, including scrutiny of donations and gifts involving Farage, pressure from Restore Britain on its right flank, and a decline in some polling measures.
Sky News also reported that Reform’s average support across nine pollsters had fallen significantly compared with the previous year.
Those developments could give Labour additional room to compete.
But they do not eliminate the underlying challenge.
Reform has demonstrated an ability to dominate political debate even when its polling position changes. Farage remains highly visible, and the party continues to organise around a clear set of themes.
What would a Labour strategy actually involve?
The central question is therefore not simply whether Labour can “stop” Farage.
It is whether Labour can develop a coherent political response to the issues on which Reform has built support.
That would require answers on immigration, public services, taxation, economic growth, housing, regional inequality and trust in government.
It would also require Labour to decide how aggressively it wants to confront Farage personally.
A strategy based heavily on attacking Reform could energise the party’s supporters. A strategy based mainly on policy competition could shift attention towards questions of governing competence and practical delivery.
The party may ultimately need both approaches, but the balance matters.
A changing political landscape
British politics is now considerably more fragmented than the traditional Labour-Conservative contest suggests.
The Conservatives are competing with Reform for voters on the right. The Greens and Liberal Democrats are competing with Labour and each other in different parts of the country. Reform itself faces pressure from parties and groups further to its right.
Recent polling therefore provides snapshots rather than definitive predictions. One poll can show Labour ahead, another can show Reform strongly positioned, and constituency-level tactical voting can produce a very different picture again.
For Labour, that uncertainty makes strategic clarity particularly important.
Farage does not need every political development to work in his favour for Reform to remain a serious force. Labour does not need to eliminate Reform to compete successfully. Both parties are operating in an environment where relatively small changes in voter behaviour can produce substantial differences between constituencies.
The growing discussion about Labour’s lack of a clear strategy is therefore less about one dramatic political moment and more about a fundamental change in Britain’s electoral landscape.
Reform UK has changed the terms of political competition. Farage has built a movement around dissatisfaction with established parties, and Labour now has to determine how it wants to compete with that movement.
The coming months will show whether Labour’s response becomes primarily a contest of policies, a battle over political identity, or a combination of the two.
For now, the central fact is clear: Reform has become too significant for Labour to treat as a temporary protest vote, while Labour cannot assume that opposition to Farage automatically translates into support for the governing party.
The political contest ahead will depend on what each party offers voters—and, ultimately, on how voters themselves respond.