https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1NQlpSoh4g

In the run-up to the 2026 local election, Feeney was filmed undercover with Reform local election candidates Jamie Campbell and Chris Whelan talking about where a local mosque might be being built. Campbell said: “There’s got to be a way of stopping that. Like, go and buy some pork chops… we’ll bury it in the ground.”

In one instance, Whelan was filmed talking about a female Reform candidate where he said: “F*** me, if she was my daughter, it would still be bath night on a Thursday… Time for your bath… I’ll wash you properly this time. Yes. Dirty bastard”. In response, Feeney said: “Oh god, we’re all going to end up in the papers”.

Miller told ITV he is a disabled individual who was heavily medicated at the time, and he has resigned from Reform.

He added: “First thing you’re f****** gone, bang… And then I’d pick up the pieces after that… 18 to 30-year-old young lads, train them up in the army in insurgency tactics so they can go street by street, house by house, picking the c**** up.”

This is the latest scandal to plunge Nigel Farage’s party into crisis despite his attempts to improve its professionalism.

In July 2024, Mr Farage acknowledged his party had “a few bad apples” but promised they “will be long gone, and we will never have any of their type back in our organisation. You have my 100% promise on that.”

Channel 4 News broadcast an undercover investigation by Verbatim Investigations in September 2026 which exposed senior figures in Reform UK discussing potential breaches of UK party funding laws.

All the councillors identified in the ITV sting have either been suspended or left the party, Reform UK confirmed last night.

Reform UK said: “Where members, activists and councillors have clearly behaved inappropriately, investigations have commenced. In some cases, there have been suspensions and due process must be followed.

“Reform UK has improved and prioritised its vetting procedures, but from time to time, a handful of individuals who do not share our values will initially make it through vetting. This is the same for all organisations.”

Labour chair Bridget Phillipson MP said: “The extreme racism and appalling behaviour exposed by this investigation is truly sickening.

“Nigel Farage needs to explain why this keeps happening in his party and why he is failing to deal with blatant racism among those who stand for public office with his backing. It’s clear that Farage and his party are determined to poison our politics and threaten the shared British values Labour will always proudly defend.

“As every day passes, the evidence piles up yet higher as to why Nigel Farage and Reform are completely unfit for office.”

Undercover: A Year In Reform, Sunday 18th October at 10.20pm on ITV1, ITVX, STV & STV Player.

Reform UK Plunged Into New Scandal as Undercover ITV Probe Exposes Violent, Racist Threats

Reform UK is facing renewed scrutiny after an undercover investigation by ITV exposed racist language, misogynistic remarks and comments advocating extreme violence among people associated with Nigel Farage’s party. The revelations have raised questions about candidate selection, internal discipline and whether Reform’s vetting procedures are keeping pace with its expansion.

The investigation, conducted over approximately 12 months, followed party candidates and councillors during election campaigns and also examined activity inside Reform’s Westminster headquarters. ITV reported that people filmed included elected representatives and individuals seeking political positions. Several individuals have resigned from the party or faced disciplinary action following the revelations. <Cite refs={[“turn175079news16″,”turn175079search3”]} />

For a party that has built much of its public identity around challenging the political establishment, the controversy presents an awkward question: how can Reform persuade voters that it is ready for greater responsibility while dealing with allegations about the conduct of some of its own representatives?

The answer will depend partly on how the party responds to individual cases, but also on whether it can demonstrate that its procedures are effective and consistently applied.

What Did the ITV Investigation Reveal?

The investigation, featured in ITV’s Exposure documentary, recorded comments by Reform councillors and candidates that included derogatory statements about ethnic minorities and Muslims, sexually explicit remarks about women and suggestions of violent punishment.

In one reported incident, a councillor from Solihull was filmed making racist comments about Asian people. Other recordings captured remarks about Black children and comments suggesting extreme violence against people accused of serious crimes.

ITV also reported that a Reform councillor from Bromley made a threat against King Charles after repeating an unsupported claim about the monarch’s religion. The councillor subsequently resigned from the party, according to ITV’s reporting. <Cite refs={[“turn175079news16″,”turn175079news17”]} />

These were not simply disagreements over immigration policy or the future of British identity. The investigation documented language directed at people on the basis of ethnicity or religion, as well as comments about violence and sexual conduct.

It is important to distinguish between the recorded remarks of particular individuals and the views of every person who supports Reform UK. The footage does not establish that all party members share the sentiments expressed. However, it does raise legitimate questions about the behaviour of people who had been selected as candidates or elected to public office under the party’s name.

The investigation also examined how some party figures discussed controversial views and whether potential candidates might be encouraged to conceal politically damaging material on social media. Those findings have increased attention on the party’s selection and vetting arrangements. <Cite refs={[“turn175079search3″,”turn175079news17”]} />

Three Councillors Leave the Party

The initial disclosures prompted a series of departures and disciplinary developments.

ITV reported that three councillors had left Reform UK following the first revelations. Among those identified were Alan Feeney and Chris Whelan, who were elected as Reform councillors in May 2026. Feeney, who had also served as deputy mayor of Solihull, said he had mutually agreed to resign from the party, citing personal reasons. Whelan also resigned, according to ITV. <Cite refs={[“turn175079news16″,”turn175079news17”]} />

Another councillor, Dean Miller, resigned after being filmed making inflammatory statements, including a threat directed at the King. In comments to ITV, Miller said he had been heavily medicated because of a chronic pain condition at the time of the recordings. His explanation does not alter what was captured, but it forms part of the response that should be considered when assessing the individual case. <Cite refs={[“turn175079news16″,”turn175079news17”]} />

The departures demonstrate that the controversy has already had consequences for some of the people involved. They do not, however, resolve the broader question of how those individuals passed through the party’s selection process or what checks were conducted before they were approved.

For Reform, the challenge is to show that disciplinary decisions are based on clear standards rather than being made only when a damaging recording becomes public.

Fresh Questions About Candidate Vetting

Reform UK has grown considerably since Nigel Farage returned to frontline electoral politics. As the party has expanded its representation in local government and Parliament, the process of recruiting, screening and supervising candidates has become increasingly important.

Farage previously promised to professionalise the organisation and keep extremists and bigots out of the party. The ITV investigation has therefore renewed scrutiny of whether those commitments have been translated into effective procedures. <Cite refs={[“turn175079news16″,”turn175079search3”]} />

Vetting political candidates is not straightforward. Parties can examine public records, online statements, references and declarations, but they cannot predict every future remark or guarantee that every candidate will behave appropriately once elected.

Nevertheless, the investigation raised questions beyond whether officials could have predicted a particular comment. ITV reported conversations suggesting that some individuals understood the political risks associated with extreme views and discussed ways to avoid attracting attention to them.

If a candidate is advised to remove controversial material because it is politically damaging, rather than being challenged over the underlying views, that raises a different issue from an ordinary screening failure.

Reform will need to explain how it assesses applicants, what happens when concerns emerge and whether the process is applied consistently across local branches and national campaigns.

A larger party also needs clear channels for reporting misconduct and a transparent process for dealing with complaints. Otherwise, the organisation risks relying on media investigations to identify problems that internal safeguards should be designed to address.

Farage Accuses Critics of Targeting Reform

Farage has challenged the investigation’s methods and argued that political opponents and established institutions want to push Reform out of the political debate.

Speaking after the initial reports, he said that it was impossible to vet people for everything they might say in the future. He also pointed to the background of one individual filmed by ITV, arguing that the person had previously been associated with the Conservative Party. <Cite refs={[“turn175079search12″,”turn175079news17”]} />

Questions about undercover journalism are legitimate. Secret recording can raise ethical issues involving privacy, deception and the context in which statements are made. Parties are entitled to scrutinise how evidence was obtained and to respond to allegations before disciplinary decisions are finalised.

However, criticism of the reporting method does not by itself answer questions about the content of the recordings. The public interest also requires scrutiny of the remarks themselves and the procedures that allowed the individuals concerned to represent the party.

Reform has said that investigations are under way and that some people have been suspended or otherwise dealt with. The party has also said that a small number of individuals who do not share its values may sometimes pass through vetting, as happens in other organisations. It insists that there is no place for racism in Reform UK. <Cite refs={[“turn175079search3″,”turn175079news16”]} />

The key test is whether those statements are followed by consistent action, with clear explanations of decisions and appropriate safeguards against similar incidents.

A New Revelation Increases the Pressure

The controversy has continued beyond the initial broadcast reports.

On 18 October, further reporting described an aspiring Reform parliamentary candidate who had been suspended after being filmed expressing extreme anti-Muslim and anti-immigration views. The remarks reportedly included a claim that Muslims could not be British and support for placing migrants in concentration camps. <Cite refs={[“turn175079news15″,”turn175079search13”]} />

These allegations broaden the debate from the conduct of elected councillors to the process through which prospective parliamentary candidates are identified and approved.

A parliamentary candidate carries a particular responsibility. Even before being elected, that individual is presented to voters as someone the party considers suitable to represent a constituency. If a candidate’s recorded statements conflict with the organisation’s declared standards, the party must explain how it reached its original decision and what changed after the evidence emerged.

Suspension is not the same as a final finding following a completed disciplinary process. The individual’s response and the outcome of any investigation remain relevant. But the episode adds to the questions Reform must address about its screening system.

What Does the Scandal Mean for Reform’s Supporters?

Reform’s electoral coalition includes people with different motivations. Some support its proposals on immigration, others are attracted by its criticism of the established parties, and some want changes to taxation, public services or the way government operates.

It would be inaccurate to assume that voters who support stricter immigration controls also endorse racist language or threats of violence. Immigration policy can be debated on its economic, legal and social merits without attacking people because of their ethnicity or religion.

Equally, a party cannot avoid scrutiny of its representatives simply by pointing to its broader policy platform. Voters have a reasonable interest in knowing whether candidates will act responsibly, respect democratic institutions and treat constituents fairly.

The consequences of the investigation may therefore vary. Some supporters may regard the revelations as evidence that the party needs stronger internal controls. Others may share Farage’s concerns about undercover reporting or believe that the comments of individual members should not define the entire organisation. Some may reconsider their support.

The available reports do not establish how widely each reaction is held. Any claim about the overall effect on public opinion would require reliable polling that specifically measures responses to the investigation.

The Political Test Ahead

The scandal arrives at a time when Reform is seeking to establish itself as a credible alternative to the established parties. That ambition requires more than electoral momentum. It also requires an organisation capable of selecting suitable candidates, enforcing standards and responding effectively when misconduct is alleged.

The party now faces several practical questions. Will its investigations produce clear outcomes? Will candidates be assessed using consistent criteria? Will those responsible for recruitment review how previous decisions were made? And will the party explain what changes, if any, it intends to introduce?

The answers matter beyond Reform itself. Political parties have a responsibility to ensure that people seeking public office understand the standards expected of them. Local councillors make decisions affecting residents’ daily lives, while parliamentary candidates ask voters to trust them with national responsibilities.

The ITV investigation does not prove that every Reform representative holds the views expressed in the recordings. Nor does it settle every dispute about the methods used to obtain the footage. It does, however, provide specific evidence of troubling remarks by people associated with the party and creates a clear basis for examining candidate selection and accountability.

For Farage, the central challenge is to demonstrate that Reform’s stated opposition to racism and extremism is reflected in its decisions, not merely in its public statements.

For voters, the most useful measure will be the evidence that emerges from the party’s response: the results of its investigations, the consistency of any sanctions and whether its recruitment procedures become more effective.

The controversy is therefore about more than damaging headlines. It is a test of how a growing political party manages responsibility, scrutiny and standards within its own ranks. The outcome will depend not on claims made by either side, but on the actions Reform takes and the evidence it provides in the weeks ahead.

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.