Tory party members gave their thoughts on Reform and Nigel Farage (Image: Getty)
Make no bones about it, as things stand the biggest threat facing the Tory party is wearing a turquoise tie. But despite the existential threat Nigel Farage and his party poses, it might surprise you to hear not all grassroots Tory members want him to disappear – in fact many agree that he’s been a hugely positive force in UK politics.
Others, however, are less kind – and see Reform’s potential election as nothing but an omnishambles in waiting. I chatted to a range of Tory members at this year’s Conservative Party Conference, currently underway in Manchester, to get their views on both Reform and its leader.
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.
Lachlan Bruce, 32, works in public affairs for a charity. He is a Conservative councillor in East Lothian. He certainly isn’t alone in his assessment of Farage.
He said: “I think that he’s a chancer and he is not for me. As a politician, he is very impressive. He’s the best politician out there by a mile. He connects, gets normal people and understands them. But he wouldn’t be able to put a cabinet together.”
Paul Salvin, 43, is an energy trader who lives in Eston, Teesside, and is a Conservative councillor for Normanby. He’s married with two children. He’s got respect for the Reform leader and shares some of his views.
He said: “He gets politics and has spoken about the right things for the last 20 years. In terms of immigration, he’s the one person in the country who has not been afraid to talk about it. If he does sort it out he’ll be in power for a decade. He’s not scared to do it for fear of being called racist.”
He added: “It’s not racist to say ‘my town is changing and I don’t like it’.”
Igraine Gray, 31, is a writer who lives in Loftus, North Yorkshire. She acknowledges Farage’s assets but is concerned about his ability to deliver.
She said: “He’s very good at knowing how people think and knowing what they care about but he doesn’t have a grasp of the details and he manages to alienate everyone he works with. I think that Reform is a bit of a one-man band.”
Peter Grogan, 46, is a father of five and grandfather of two. He’s self-employed in the fire protection industry, lives in Redcar, and is a councillor in Kirkleatham.
He said: “He understands people. He gets public opinion quite early and better than most politicians. He seems to understand why people are angry and fights on that – however his other policies apart from immigration, are quite flimsy.”
David Dixon, 77, is a retired control systems engineer and he has been a Conservative councillor since 2019. He lives in Barlborough and is married to Maxine, 71, who is also a Conservative parish councillor. They have three children, two grandchildren and two great-grandchildren. He didn’t mince his words when asked about Farage.
He said: “I can’t abide Nigel Farage. I see him as a showman with no substance.”
Stephen Ayshford, 28, works in events. He’s from Bristol but lives in London with his partner. He also acknowledges Farage’s strengths.
He said: “He is charismatic and there is no doubting that he has changed British politics.”
But he added: “There’s a few issues. It’s the uncertainty that Reform poses, as there is no coherence – for example, when it comes to economics. They are also untested. We’re not doing the best [on economics] but I think that we can get there and we are moving back to what we should be doing. Reform doesn’t have the depth or the principles.”
One member, however, could be the latest on the Tory defection list if things within her own party don’t change. Jane Rose, 64, is a retired lawyer, married with three children and two grandchildren. She lives in Beckenham, London. She spoke about the pull to Reform.
She said: “They are more Conservative than we are. They have got Conservative policies. In fact, I found it difficult campaigning last election as I agreed with everything Reform said. I’m not saying that I will always be a Tory member – in fact they need to convince me to stay.”
Asked about the possibility of a Reform PM her response was perhaps surprising.
She said: “In many ways I do hope it’s Farage.”
I’m at Tory Conference – This Is What We Really Think of Reform and Nigel Farage
The Conservative Party conference has once again become an important setting for debate about the future of Britain’s political right. With Reform UK continuing to attract significant public attention and Nigel Farage positioning his party as a major challenger to the Conservatives, questions about the relationship between the two parties have been impossible to avoid.
Inside the Conservative conference, attitudes towards Reform are not necessarily straightforward. There are disagreements about how seriously the party should be treated, how Conservatives should respond to Farage, and whether the two parties can compete for voters without allowing the debate to dominate the Conservative agenda.
The issue matters because the Conservative Party is attempting to rebuild following its heavy defeat at the 2024 general election. Reform UK, meanwhile, has sought to expand beyond its previous role as a protest-focused party and establish itself as a permanent force in British politics.
For Conservative activists and politicians attending the conference, this creates a complicated situation.
Some Conservatives regard Reform as a direct electoral threat. They point to the party’s strong performances in opinion polls and local elections and argue that it is competing for voters who might otherwise support the Conservatives.
Others take a different view. They believe the Conservatives should concentrate on rebuilding their own political identity rather than allowing Nigel Farage to dictate the terms of political debate.
This difference of opinion was visible throughout discussions surrounding the conference.
Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative leader, has sought to establish a clear distinction between her party and Reform. Her argument is that the Conservatives need to learn from the mistakes that contributed to their 2024 defeat while developing a credible programme for government.
That approach does not mean ignoring Reform.
The Conservatives have increasingly had to address many of the issues that Reform places at the centre of its political messaging, including immigration, taxation, national sovereignty and public services.
However, there is an important difference between responding to a competitor and allowing that competitor to determine a party’s entire strategy.
For some Conservatives, this is precisely the danger posed by Farage.
Nigel Farage is an experienced political communicator who has built a national profile over several decades. His role in the Brexit campaign made him one of the most recognisable figures in British politics, while his leadership of Reform has given him a new political platform.
His ability to attract media attention is widely acknowledged, but Conservative reactions to him vary considerably.
Some party members believe Farage has successfully identified concerns that mainstream politicians failed to address. Immigration is one example. Reform has made reducing illegal migration and changing Britain’s immigration system central elements of its programme.
Some Conservatives agree with the underlying concerns but argue that the Conservative Party is better placed to implement policy because of its experience of government.
Others are more critical of Reform’s approach and believe that the Conservatives should offer a different political argument rather than attempting to imitate Farage.
This disagreement helps explain why conversations about Reform at the conference can become complicated.
There is also a personal dimension.
Farage and Badenoch occupy different positions within the broader political right. Farage has spent much of his career challenging the political establishment, while Badenoch leads one of Britain’s oldest political parties.
Reform can therefore present itself as an outsider movement, whereas the Conservatives have the institutional experience associated with being a governing party.
For Conservative activists, deciding how to respond to this contrast is not simply a matter of personalities. It is also a question about the party’s future identity.
The 2024 general election was a major turning point.
The Conservatives lost hundreds of parliamentary seats, leaving the party with its smallest number of MPs in its modern history. Labour formed the government, while Reform won five parliamentary seats despite receiving a substantial national vote share.
Since then, Reform has continued to expand its organisation.
The party’s success at the 2025 local elections was particularly significant. Reform won hundreds of council seats and gained control of several local authorities. These results demonstrated that the party could convert national visibility into local electoral representation.
For Conservatives at the conference, that development cannot easily be dismissed.
Local elections and by-elections are not identical to general elections, and their results must be interpreted within their particular circumstances. Nevertheless, they provide evidence that Reform has developed a stronger electoral organisation than it possessed in previous years.
This has intensified debate inside Conservative circles.
One group argues that the Conservatives must take Reform seriously because ignoring a growing competitor could result in further losses.
Another argues that constantly discussing Farage risks strengthening him by giving Reform additional publicity.
Both perspectives have practical implications.
If Conservatives attack Reform too aggressively, they may give Farage more attention. If they ignore the party completely, they may fail to address voters who are considering switching their support.
The challenge is therefore to acknowledge the competition while maintaining a distinct Conservative message.
Polling provides another reason why the issue remains important.
Different polling companies have produced different results, but Reform has repeatedly recorded substantial levels of national support. In one Ipsos survey conducted in September 2026, Labour was on 27%, Reform on 23% and the Conservatives on 21%.
These figures do not establish what would happen at a future general election. National voting intention is only a snapshot, and Britain’s first-past-the-post electoral system means that the geographical distribution of votes is crucial.
Nevertheless, the polling demonstrates that Reform cannot simply be treated as an insignificant political movement.
The Conservative conference therefore provides an opportunity for Badenoch to explain what her party would offer that Reform does not.
That could involve economic policy, public services, defence, immigration, taxation or institutional reform. But the central requirement is clarity.
Voters need to understand what the Conservatives would actually do if they returned to government.
This is particularly important because some voters who previously supported the Conservatives may now be considering Reform for different reasons. Some may be primarily concerned about immigration. Others may be dissatisfied with taxation or government spending. Some may simply believe that the established parties have become disconnected from their concerns.
There is no single Reform voter.
That makes the Conservative response more complicated than simply adopting a harder position on one issue.
The conference discussions also reveal a generational and cultural dimension to the debate. Some Conservative activists remain strongly attached to traditional Conservative principles, while others are searching for a new political identity following the party’s electoral defeat.
Farage’s political style appeals to some voters precisely because he presents himself as an outsider.
The Conservatives cannot easily reproduce that identity because they are an established political institution. Instead, they must decide what advantages their institutional experience can provide.
Government experience is one obvious example.
The Conservatives governed Britain for much of the period between 2010 and 2024. That gives the party a substantial record that voters can evaluate. It includes policies that supporters regard as achievements and decisions that critics believe contributed to the party’s electoral decline.
Reform does not have the same record of national government.
This distinction gives voters a concrete basis for comparison.
The Conservative Party can be judged on its previous record in government, while Reform’s national governing programme remains largely prospective.
For some Conservatives, this makes experience an important part of their argument. For others, the previous record is precisely why they believe the party needs significant renewal.
The conference therefore involves a debate not simply about Reform, but about the Conservatives themselves.
What should the party retain?
What should it change?
How should it respond to voters who have moved elsewhere?
And how should it distinguish itself from Reform while continuing to compete for similar sections of the electorate?
There are no simple answers.
The Conservative Party is a broad political organisation containing different views on economics, social policy, immigration and Britain’s relationship with the rest of the world.
Reform is also developing its own broader political programme as it seeks to expand.
The competition between the two parties is consequently likely to continue.
For people attending the Conservative conference, the important point is that attitudes towards Reform are not uniform. Some see Farage as a serious competitor, some see him as a political opportunity, and others believe that the Conservatives should focus primarily on rebuilding themselves.
What unites these different perspectives is recognition that Britain’s political landscape has changed.
The old assumption that Conservative voters would automatically remain within the Conservative Party can no longer be taken for granted.
Reform has demonstrated that it can attract support from people who previously voted Conservative, while Labour and other parties are also competing for voters across traditional political boundaries.
That means the future of the Conservative Party will depend partly on how it responds to this fragmentation.
The conference is therefore less about producing a single answer to Nigel Farage and more about defining the Conservative Party’s own direction.
If Badenoch can establish a clear identity for the Conservatives, voters will have a clearer basis on which to compare the party with Reform, Labour and the other political alternatives.
Ultimately, those decisions belong to Conservative members and, at elections, to voters.
For now, the atmosphere at the Tory conference illustrates one important reality: Reform and Nigel Farage are impossible for Conservatives to ignore, but there is considerable disagreement about precisely how they should be confronted.
Some see Reform as a threat to the Conservative electoral coalition. Others see its rise as evidence that the Conservatives need to rethink their approach. Still others believe the party should focus on its own policies rather than reacting to Farage.
The debate is likely to continue well beyond the conference.
As British politics becomes more fragmented, the Conservatives will have to define what they stand for, explain how they would govern and decide how they want to compete with an increasingly established Reform UK.
The relationship between the two parties will remain one of the central questions shaping the future of Britain’s political right.