Wes Streeting has accused Sarah Pochin of “racism” after the Reform MP said it drives her “mad” when she sees adverts full of “black and asian people”. The Health Secretary said the language was a “disgrace” and marks a return to “1970s and 1980s style racism”.
Ms Pochin has apologised for her comments but Mr Streeting said the “silence” from Reform UK leader Nigel Farage on the matter is “deafening”. “I think what she said was a disgrace,” he told the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg show. “I think it was racist, and the deafening silence from her party leader says it all. Reform is a party who thinks that our flag only belongs to some of us who look like me, not all of us who have built this country’s success.”
Wes Streeting (Image: Getty)
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.
His remarks come just two weeks after Sir Keir Starmer labelled Reform’s plans to deport 600,000 migrants as racist.
Referencing the servicemen and women who had fought for Britain in the past, the Health Secretary added: “Let’s not forget when we remember the service and the sacrifice with this Poppy that the people who bled and died for our democracy and our freedom weren’t just my grandfather and my great grandfather, who looked like me and worshiped the same God as me.
“It was people from right across what was then the Empire, now the Commonwealth, people who are Muslim people, who are Sikh, people, who are Hindu people who look differently than you and I do.
“And we should remember that, defend it and fight for what this country stands for – a decent, respectful and inclusive democracy, the most successful multi faith democracy in the world.
“We stand for that Reform don’t and that’s why they’re not fit to govern.”
Over the weekend Ms Pochin, the MP for Runcorn and Helsby, said “it drives me mad when I see adverts full of black people, full of Asian people” during an interview.
Following a backlash said her comments were “phrased poorly” but insisted that many adverts are “unrepresentative of British society”.
The Runcorn and Helsby MP was responding to a viewer on TalkTV who complained about the demographics of advertising.
The MP said the viewer was “absolutely right” and “it drives me mad when I see adverts full of black people, full of Asian people”.
She said: “It doesn’t reflect our society and I feel that your average white person, average white family is… not represented anymore.”
Ms Pochin blamed the situation on the “woke liberati” in the “arty-farty world”.
“It might be fine inside the M25, but it’s definitely not representative of the rest of the country,” she said.
In a later statement, she said she was trying to say the advertising industry had gone “DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) mad”.
She said: “My comments were phrased poorly and I apologise for any offence caused, which was not my intention.
“The point I was trying to make is that the British advertising agency world have gone DEI mad and many adverts are now unrepresentative of British society as a whole.
“I will endeavour to ensure my language is more accurate going forward.”
Zia Yusuf, Reform UK’s head of policy, described Sarah Pochin as a “close friend” and “great MP”, and acknowledged she had made the “poorly phrased” comments and had apologised.
However, speaking on Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips, he said her comments had to be “put into context”, adding people must be able to “talk about” representation in television advertising.
Mr Yusuf said he believed the Talk TV caller who Ms Pochin was in conversation with was “right to be upset about the massive under-representation of some groups in television advertising and significant overrepresentation of others – and we have to be able to talk about these things”.
He added: “I think it is a very valid point. We must be able to talk about it.”
Liberal Democrat Home Affairs Spokesperson Max Wilkinson said: “Sarah Pochin’s so-called apology was nothing more than a shameless attempt to dodge responsibility for her own words. Instead of showing a shred of remorse, she’s doubled down and tried to excuse the inexcusable.
“Nigel Farage keeps insisting that racism has no place in his party. Now is his chance to prove it – he must withdraw the whip or concede that Reform tolerates blatant racism.”
Reform UK has been contacted for further comment.
Reform UK Racism Row Erupts Over ‘Adverts Full of Black People’ as Wes Streeting Slams MP
A political row erupted in Britain after Reform UK MP Sarah Pochin apologised for remarks about the racial representation of people appearing in television advertisements, prompting Health Secretary Wes Streeting to accuse her of making racist comments and to demand a stronger response from Reform leader Nigel Farage.
The controversy began during a TalkTV appearance in October 2025, when Pochin, the MP for Runcorn and Helsby, was responding to a viewer who complained about the ethnic representation of people appearing in television advertising.
Pochin agreed with the caller and said that it “drives me mad when I see adverts full of black people, full of Asian people”. She continued by arguing that such advertising did not reflect British society and said she believed the “average white person, average white family” was no longer represented.
Her comments immediately became a national political controversy.
Pochin subsequently apologised for the way she had expressed herself, saying her remarks had been “phrased poorly”. However, she maintained that the underlying point she had intended to make concerned what she regarded as excessive diversity, equity and inclusion policies within the advertising industry.
She said she believed many advertisements had become “unrepresentative of British society as a whole” and said she would try to use more accurate language in future.
Wes Streeting’s condemnation
The strongest political reaction came from Wes Streeting.
The Health Secretary described Pochin’s remarks as racist and said they represented a type of racial rhetoric that he believed Britain had moved beyond. Speaking to the BBC, Streeting called the comments “a disgrace” and criticised Farage for what he described as a failure to immediately condemn them.
Streeting argued that politicians should confront racist language rather than allow it to become normalised.
He also connected the controversy with wider concerns about racism in Britain, saying that he had recently spoken with school pupils in his Ilford North constituency about their experiences of racism.
His intervention transformed what had initially been a controversy surrounding one Reform MP into a wider political confrontation between Labour and Reform.
Streeting’s comments were not simply about advertising. They became part of a broader argument over how Reform UK discusses race, immigration, national identity and diversity.
Labour Party chair Anna Turley also condemned Pochin’s remarks, arguing that defining British people according to skin colour was unacceptable. She called on Farage to make clear whether Pochin’s views were acceptable within Reform UK.
Pochin’s apology
Pochin’s response attempted to distinguish her wording from the argument she said she intended to make.
In her apology, she said that she had been trying to criticise the advertising industry’s approach to diversity and claimed that the industry had gone “DEI mad”.
She did not withdraw her argument that advertising could sometimes be unrepresentative of British society. Instead, she acknowledged that the language she had used was inappropriate and promised to be more precise.
That distinction became central to the political dispute.
Supporters of Pochin’s position could interpret her comments as an argument about commercial representation and the influence of diversity policies. Her critics argued that focusing specifically on the number of black and Asian people in advertisements, and saying that their presence “drives me mad”, went beyond a neutral discussion about advertising practices.
The controversy therefore involved two separate questions: what Pochin intended to argue and how her words were reasonably understood by listeners.
Farage’s response
Nigel Farage eventually responded to the controversy, but his position differed from that of Streeting and other Labour politicians.
Farage said he was unhappy with Pochin’s comments and described the wording as “ugly” and “clumsy”. However, he rejected the interpretation that she had deliberately made a racist statement.
According to Sky News, Farage said that if he believed Pochin’s words had been deliberately and genuinely racist, he would have taken action against her. He nevertheless acknowledged that the way she had expressed herself was wrong.
The Guardian reported that Farage said he understood the broader point Pochin was attempting to make about diversity policies in advertising, while still criticising the wording she had chosen.
This created a clear difference between the two sides of the political argument.
Streeting treated the remarks as racist and called for them to be confronted directly.
Farage acknowledged that the comments were unacceptable in their wording but rejected the conclusion that Pochin had deliberately expressed racist views.
Reform’s internal reaction
The response from within Reform UK was also significant.
Zia Yusuf, the party’s head of policy, said Pochin was right to apologise but argued that there should still be room for discussion about representation in television advertising.
Yusuf said he knew Pochin well and had played an important role in her selection as a Reform candidate. He described her as a close friend and said that she had expressed herself poorly.
At the same time, Yusuf argued that the underlying question raised by the TalkTV caller — whether certain groups were underrepresented and others overrepresented in television advertising — was legitimate and should be open to discussion.
His comments illustrated the difficulty Reform faced.
The party wanted to defend the principle that questions about diversity and representation could be discussed openly, while also acknowledging that Pochin’s particular wording had caused widespread offence.
The debate over advertising
Behind the political controversy lies a broader discussion about representation in British advertising.
Advertising has changed considerably in recent years, with companies increasingly featuring people from different ethnic backgrounds in campaigns.
Research cited during the controversy indicated that the proportion of advertisements featuring black people had increased substantially after 2020. The Guardian reported figures showing an increase from 37 percent of advertisements in 2020 to 45 percent in 2021 and 51 percent in 2022, before the figure fell slightly to 49 percent in 2023.
Those figures do not, however, establish that advertising should mirror the country’s population precisely in every campaign.
Companies make advertising decisions for many reasons, including their target market, brand identity, commercial strategy and the audiences they want to reach.
The question of whether representation is excessive or insufficient is therefore partly a matter of political and cultural interpretation.
A divided public debate
Polling conducted around the controversy also showed that public opinion on diversity in advertising was not uniform.
Research cited in coverage of the dispute found differences between ethnic groups and political supporters when respondents were asked whether advertising adequately represented different sections of society.
Such findings suggest that there is a genuine public debate over representation.
However, that debate does not necessarily resolve the controversy surrounding Pochin’s language.
People can disagree about advertising policy while also believing that politicians should avoid language that identifies the presence of particular ethnic groups as inherently objectionable.
That distinction became particularly important because Pochin was not speaking simply as a television viewer. She was an elected MP appearing on a national political programme.
The parliamentary dimension
The controversy eventually reached the House of Commons.
On October 27, Labour MP Dawn Butler raised Pochin’s comments as a point of order. Butler said that British identity should not be determined by skin colour and described Pochin’s remarks as racist.
The Deputy Speaker’s intervention highlighted an important parliamentary distinction between criticising a statement and directly accusing another MP of being racist.
That distinction matters because parliamentary debate operates under specific rules governing personal allegations and conduct.
The episode therefore moved from television and social media into the formal parliamentary environment.
Why the row mattered to Reform
For Reform UK, the controversy raised broader questions about how the party manages statements by its MPs.
Reform has built part of its political identity around challenging what it describes as political correctness, DEI policies and established approaches to immigration and integration.
That political position means that disputes involving race and diversity are especially sensitive.
Pochin’s remarks also came after other controversies involving her.
Earlier in 2025, she had attracted attention after calling for a ban on the burqa during Prime Minister’s Questions. That intervention generated disagreement within Reform and contributed to wider debates about the party’s position on religious clothing and integration.
The advertising controversy was separate from that issue, but it added to the scrutiny surrounding Pochin.
The political confrontation with Labour
Streeting’s intervention also reflected the broader relationship between Labour and Reform.
Reform had positioned itself as a major challenger to the established political parties, while Labour had increasingly attacked the party over its positions on immigration, national identity and public services.
The Pochin controversy provided Labour with another opportunity to challenge Reform’s political language.
For Streeting, the issue was about confronting racism.
For Reform figures, the discussion was partly about whether concerns over representation could be discussed without being automatically dismissed as racist.
The two sides were therefore debating both the substance of Pochin’s comments and the boundaries of acceptable political language.
Farage’s balancing act
Farage’s response demonstrated the difficulty of managing such controversies as Reform grows.
He could acknowledge that Pochin’s wording was wrong without accepting Labour’s broader interpretation of her intentions.
That was the position he ultimately adopted.
He said he was unhappy with what Pochin had said and accepted that the wording was “ugly”, while arguing that the comments should be understood in the context of her criticism of diversity policies in advertising.
The response did not end the controversy.
Streeting and other critics continued to argue that Pochin’s comments were racist, while Reform figures continued to distinguish between the wording and the underlying debate about representation.
A debate over language, representation and politics
The Pochin controversy ultimately became larger than the original television exchange.
It raised questions about how ethnic representation should be handled in advertising, how companies respond to diversity concerns and how politicians should speak about race.
It also demonstrated how quickly a short statement by an elected representative can become a national political story.
Pochin apologised for her wording but continued to argue that the advertising industry had adopted diversity policies that could sometimes produce an unrepresentative picture of British society.
Streeting rejected that framing and characterised her remarks as racist.
Farage acknowledged that the language was unacceptable but disputed the interpretation of deliberate racist intent.
Those competing interpretations explain why the controversy continued after the apology.
For Reform UK, the episode became another test of how the party balances its opposition to what it considers excessive political correctness with the responsibilities that come with parliamentary representation.
For Labour, it provided an opportunity to challenge Reform over its approach to race and public discourse.
And for the wider public, it reopened a complicated question: how should Britain debate representation in advertising while ensuring that political discussion about race remains precise, respectful and open to disagreement?
The dispute over Pochin’s comments did not provide a single answer.
Instead, it demonstrated how questions of advertising, identity, race and political language have become deeply connected in Britain’s increasingly polarised political debate.