NIgel Farage celebrating local election wins in May 2025 (Image: Getty)

No further information on the nature of the complaints has been forthcoming from Reform UK.

Most recently, councillor Isabella Kemp, who represents Sheppey on KCC, was suspended from the party ahead of a council meeting on Thursday.

It has been reported by the BBC that Ms Kemp is also considering legal action against Reform UK.

There are now 48 Reform councillors, with nine members having been either suspended or removed since then.

“Some had quit because they couldn’t hack it, others have been thrown out for bad behaviour, because they weren’t good enough or they weren’t team players – not up to the challenge or were simply unable or unwilling to accept discipline,” she said.

Leader of the opposition, Liberal Democrat Antony Hook, implied the Reform administration had made Kent County Council a “punchline” on Have I Got News For You.

“I’m told that people are literally placing bets on whether the administration will last until Christmas or Easter,” he said.

Conservative group leader Harry Rayner said KCC had been made a “laughing stock” by the current administration.

Reform Civil War Explodes as Councillor Banned for ‘Erotic Novel’ Vows Legal Action

Reform UK has been plunged into another internal dispute after a Kent councillor removed from the party said he was considering legal action over what he described as damage to his reputation.

Robert Ford, a Reform councillor on Kent County Council, was removed from the party in October 2025 following an unofficial complaint involving several female members of staff. Ford subsequently claimed that the controversy was connected to an erotic novel he had written and published before entering local politics. He has said he is taking legal advice and intends to pursue the matter.

The dispute is significant because it comes during a period of considerable turbulence within Reform’s Kent operation.

Reform UK won control of Kent County Council in May 2025, securing 57 of the council’s 81 seats and ending decades of Conservative control. However, only months after its historic victory, the party had lost several councillors through suspensions and expulsions. According to reports, nine councillors had either been suspended or removed by November.

The rapid deterioration of relations has created an increasingly difficult situation for the party’s leadership.

Ford’s case is particularly unusual because of the explanation he has given for the controversy. Speaking outside County Hall, he said he had discovered that complaints made against him related to his novel writing. He argued that his reputation had been damaged because he had written and published an erotic novel and had mentioned it to several people at the council.

Ford has strongly disputed the implication that the novel itself justified his removal.

He said he was astonished that his name could be damaged publicly simply because he had written an erotic novel that was published by a major company. He also suggested that the real background to his suspension involved an email he had sent to colleagues concerning alleged bullying within the council. Reform has denied allegations of bullying.

The distinction is important.

Writing an adult novel is not, by itself, evidence of misconduct in public office. The question in Ford’s case is instead what conduct led to the complaints, what evidence was presented to Reform, what internal procedures were followed and whether the party’s public statements accurately described the circumstances.

Those questions could become particularly important if Ford proceeds with a defamation claim.

Ford has said that he is taking legal advice regarding alleged defamation by Reform UK and Kent County Council. He has indicated that he intends to pursue the issue “with vigour” in the coming months.

At this stage, however, a threat of legal action should not be confused with a court finding. No court has established that Reform or the council defamed Ford, and the precise legal basis of any future claim would depend on the statements made, their publication and their effect on his reputation.

The dispute has nevertheless added to a much wider crisis inside Kent Reform.

Another major flashpoint involved council leader Linden Kemkaran. A leaked video showed Kemkaran swearing and shouting during a council meeting, with the leader reportedly telling party members to accept her decisions. The footage intensified disagreements within the administration and contributed to further disciplinary action against councillors.

Several Reform councillors were subsequently expelled, while another remained suspended. The party linked some of those councillors to the leaking of the video.

Kemkaran has defended her leadership and has received the backing of Nigel Farage, who reportedly said he supported her “100%”. The dispute has nevertheless generated questions from opposition politicians about whether the Reform administration can maintain unity and function effectively.

The internal conflict illustrates the challenge facing Reform as it moves from being primarily a national political campaign into a party responsible for running local authorities.

Winning a large number of council seats is one thing. Managing councils requires committees, budgets, officers, legal procedures and cooperation between elected representatives. Political disagreements that might remain relatively contained within an opposition party can become much more consequential when that party controls a major local authority.

Kent is therefore an important test.

The council has 81 elected members, making it one of England’s largest county councils. Reform’s victory gave the party substantial control, but the subsequent departures have reduced its numbers and created divisions among councillors who were elected on the same ticket.

Ford has since formed an “Independent Reformers” group alongside other councillors who have broken away from the party.

That development matters because every councillor who leaves a governing group potentially changes the balance of power inside the authority.

The controversy also raises questions about Reform’s internal disciplinary procedures.

Political parties need mechanisms for dealing with complaints involving elected representatives and staff. Those procedures have to balance several competing interests: protecting employees, allowing legitimate complaints to be investigated, ensuring accused individuals receive a fair process and protecting the reputation of the organisation.

When disciplinary decisions become public before all the facts are known, disputes can quickly become political.

That appears to be what has happened in Ford’s case.

Ford argues that the public explanation for his removal unfairly damaged his reputation. Reform, meanwhile, has taken disciplinary action and has not accepted his account of events.

Until any legal proceedings or independent investigation establish otherwise, both positions remain claims made by the respective parties.

The broader political consequences are nevertheless difficult to ignore.

Reform UK has presented itself as a party determined to challenge what it describes as failures by the established political parties. Its rapid growth has brought considerable electoral success, particularly in local government. But that growth also means the party is now being judged on its ability to manage elected representatives and institutions.

Internal disputes therefore attract much greater attention than they would have done when Reform was a smaller organisation.

For Nigel Farage, this creates a difficult balancing act.

He has built Reform around strong central leadership and a clear political message. At the same time, the party has attracted hundreds of councillors with different professional backgrounds, personalities and political priorities.

Maintaining discipline across such a rapidly expanding organisation is inevitably difficult.

The events in Kent demonstrate the consequences when those relationships break down.

The dispute involving Ford is particularly sensitive because it concerns both personal reputation and political discipline. His claim that his novel was at the heart of the complaints has generated considerable public interest, while his allegation that the real dispute involved an email about alleged bullying introduces another dimension.

Reform’s opponents have used the wider turmoil to question the party’s ability to govern. Supporters, by contrast, can argue that disciplinary action is evidence that the organisation is willing to deal with internal problems rather than ignore them.

The truth of individual allegations will ultimately depend on evidence.

What is already clear is that Reform’s Kent administration has experienced a remarkable series of internal conflicts only months after taking control of the council.

The situation also demonstrates how quickly social-media disputes, leaked recordings and internal disagreements can become national political stories.

For Ford, the immediate issue is his reputation and his potential legal case.

For Reform, the larger question is whether the party can turn electoral momentum into stable local government.

And for Kent residents, the most important consideration is whether the council can continue delivering services effectively despite the political turmoil.

The controversy surrounding an “erotic novel” may sound unusual, but the underlying issue is much more serious: how should a rapidly expanding political party handle internal discipline, allegations, staff complaints and disagreements among its elected representatives?

Those questions will not be answered by headlines alone.

If Ford does proceed with legal action, the evidence and statements involved could receive further scrutiny. Until then, his allegations should be treated as allegations rather than established facts.

What the episode has already demonstrated, however, is that Reform’s biggest challenge may not always come from its traditional political opponents.

As the party expands across Britain, managing its own councillors, maintaining internal discipline and dealing transparently with disputes could become just as important as attacking Labour, the Conservatives or the wider political establishment.

The Kent controversy is therefore another test of whether Reform can transform electoral success into effective and durable political organisation.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.