Nigel Farage speaks to Essex County Council leader Peter Harris (Image: Will Colebourne/the Press Association)
Nigel Farage slammed the “establishment” for their latest attack on Reform as he claimed Tory members hold worse views. An ITV News investigation found councillors and candidates within Reform UK had used racist language. In one excerpt, black children were referred to as “animals”, while in another a Reform member said his area had become “infested” with Asian families.
But the Reform UK leader, speaking exclusively to the Daily Express, dismissed fears that people with racist views were particularly attracted to his party. And he suggested sending spies into the Tory party.
Mr Farage revealed ITV News “infiltrated” the party’s headquarters, and only “got me telling a joke” and a “press officer using a swear word”. He told the Daily Express: “They wouldn’t do it to anybody else, would they? I mean, they’ve spent a year on this, goodness knows how much money.
“The worst miscreant, whose quotes have been all over the BBC and everywhere, was, of course, a long-term Tory councillor. But he was never followed undercover as a Tory councillor, was he? But he has been in Reform.
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.
“They have met literally hundreds of people. They’ve been to all the by-elections. They’ve spoken to hundreds of people. They’ve tried to provoke conversations, and they’ve managed to find a handful of people who said unpleasant things, which we have acted on already.”
He continued: “The idea that this is somehow a failure of our vetting is absolutely for the birds. You can’t vet what people are going to say in the future. You can’t vet what people say to each other.
“They would not do this to any other party. And it’s yet another example, after Channel 4 and all the rest of it. I mean, this literally is the establishment trying to do everything they can to throw us out of the picture.”
Asked if Reform was attracting the wrong sort of character, Mr Farage said: “Not compared to the Conservative Party, no.
“The worst miscreant was a long-term Conservative. A Kemi supporter.”
Mr Farage said his party vets “much more heavily than other parties”.
Asked how Reform can convince voters it doesn’t have a racism problem, Mr Farage said: “That’s what they’re trying to do. That’s exactly what they – I tell you what, maybe what I’ll do is I’ll commission a team of undercover [operatives], and we’ll go and speak to a thousand Tory councillors. You’ll find worse.
“You’ll find it everywhere.
“You’ll find it in the pub tonight. It’s people, and particularly if they’re provoking conversation. Not everyone’s been to Oxford University. Not everyone’s been to Eton.
“Not everyone expresses themselves in very carefully formulated language. People just say what they blooming-well think.
“The massive investment that is going in to try and discredit an entire political movement on a handful of people here and a handful of people there tells you, frankly, all you need to know.”
The Reform UK leader insisted his party will rise back up through the polls.
Nigel Farage speaks to Daily Express Home Affairs Editor Michael Knowles (Image: STEVE FINN PHOTOGRAPHY)
He said: “This is all just absolute nonsense.
“Think how many MPs have been to prison. Think how many, you know, ex-MPs have done goodness knows what over the years. I mean, the effective Deputy Prime Minister is a convicted fraudster.
“What is more serious? Some bloke representing a small district council who says something that is unpleasant, or the Deputy Prime Minister being a convicted fraudster? It’s about scale.”
Asked how he will convince voters a Reform Government wouldn’t be scandal after scandal, Mr Farage said: “It depends how it’s portrayed. It depends how it’s portrayed.”
He added: “We are with the biggest political party in Britain by membership. We’ve got millions of supporters. You know, I mean you could go down the street now and find someone who says he’s a Reform voter and you find he’s a convicted murderer. Would you judge me by him? I hope not.”
In the run-up to the 2026 local election, Councillor Alan Feeney, the deputy mayor of Solihull, was filmed undercover with Reform local election candidates Jamie Campbell and Chris Whelan.
In one instance, Whelan was filmed talking about a female Reform candidate where he said “‘If she’d have given me a hug, I’d have f****** fingered her”.
When talking about another female Reform candidate, Whelan 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”.
Feeney also called Asian homeowners “parasites”.
He was caught on camera adding: “I’d be saying no more than 1% of [the] British population can be non-white… you’d need a proper nuclear option, like literally drag them out of their homes, stick them on planes and f*** them off to Pakistan, which you’ll never do in a month of Sundays… You just have to make it a country they don’t want to be in… I mean you’re getting to a point where you ban Muslims from standing from public office”.
Asked by reporters about the investigation during a visit to the North West, Prime Minister Andy Burnham said: “We’ve allowed a poison into our politics in recent years, and it’s time to draw a line under it.
“In fact, I praised the Leader of the Opposition (Kemi Badenoch) in the House of Commons yesterday afternoon, who herself drew a line at her party conference between her party and that type of politics, and we all need to call it out more.
“I’m pleased ITV has done this.
“There is no place for any form of racism, antisemitism, discrimination in British politics, and we all should be relentless in repeating that and taking the firmest possible action.
“And I hope the Reform Party will take immediate and firm action against those who’ve been revealed to be making these abhorrent comments.”
Nigel Farage Eviscerates ITV Undercover Hit on Reform UK – ‘They Should Spy on Tories!’
Nigel Farage has hit back at ITV following an undercover investigation that exposed racist remarks, misogynistic comments and violent rhetoric among some Reform UK councillors and political candidates. The Reform leader has questioned why television investigators have concentrated on his party, arguing that similar scrutiny should be applied to the Conservatives and other political organisations.
The dispute has quickly become about more than the offensive comments captured on camera. It has developed into a wider argument about investigative journalism, political accountability and whether Reform UK has done enough to prevent people with extremist views from representing the party.
Farage maintains that his organisation is being targeted because it challenges the established political order. ITV, meanwhile, has presented footage gathered during a year-long investigation, including recordings from Reform campaigning activities and the party’s Westminster headquarters. Its reporting raises questions not only about what individual representatives said, but also about how senior officials responded when allegations of racism emerged. <Cite refs={[“turn590194search0″,”turn590194search1″,”turn590194news17”]} />
For Reform, the immediate challenge is to defend its position without appearing to dismiss the seriousness of the recordings. For ITV, the challenge is to demonstrate that its undercover methods were justified by the public interest and that the material has been presented fairly.
Farage Challenges ITV’s Decision to Target Reform
Speaking in Chelmsford on 15 October, Farage argued that the investigation reflected a wider effort by established political and media institutions to undermine his party.
He questioned why ITV had devoted substantial investigative resources to Reform UK rather than conducting a comparable investigation into Conservative councillors. He also pointed out that one of the individuals whose comments attracted particular attention had previously been a Conservative councillor before joining Reform.
Farage argued that political candidates cannot be vetted for everything they might say in the future, particularly if conversations are conducted covertly and participants are encouraged to discuss controversial subjects. He maintained that Reform already applies stricter vetting procedures than other parties. <Cite refs={[“turn590194search0″,”turn590194news17”]} />
His argument touches on a genuine question about political journalism: should an undercover investigation concentrate on a party experiencing rapid growth, or should similar investigations examine every major political organisation?
There is a reasonable case for scrutiny across the political spectrum. Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat and Reform representatives all exercise public responsibilities, and allegations of serious misconduct should be investigated regardless of party affiliation.
However, the existence of possible misconduct elsewhere does not determine whether the evidence collected against Reform is valid. If ITV has documented inappropriate statements by Reform representatives, the relevant questions concern the authenticity, context and significance of that material.
A comparable investigation into another party could be justified on its own merits. It would not, by itself, resolve the allegations raised by the existing footage.
What ITV Actually Recorded
ITV’s Exposure investigation, titled Undercover: A Year in Reform, documented comments by councillors and candidates that included racist language, hostility towards Muslims, misogynistic remarks and suggestions of violence.
Among the people filmed was Alan Feeney, a former Conservative councillor who joined Reform and was elected to Solihull Borough Council in May 2026. ITV reported that Feeney made racist statements about Asian people and Muslims during campaigning conversations. He subsequently resigned from Reform, saying that he had mutually agreed to leave for personal reasons.
Chris Whelan, another Solihull councillor elected for Reform, also resigned from the party, citing personal and health reasons. ITV’s reporting included sexually aggressive remarks attributed to Whelan and other individuals. <Cite refs={[“turn590194news17″,”turn590194news12”]} />
The investigation also recorded remarks by people involved in Reform campaigning elsewhere in England and Wales. Some comments went beyond criticism of immigration policy and included suggestions of violent action against migrants or people from particular religious and ethnic backgrounds.
These distinctions matter. A political party can advocate stricter immigration controls, changes to asylum procedures or stronger border enforcement without endorsing racial hostility or violence. Equally, public representatives remain accountable for comments that target people on the basis of ethnicity or religion.
The footage should not be used to suggest that every Reform member or supporter shares the views expressed by those recorded. It does, however, provide grounds for examining the behaviour of the specific individuals involved and the processes through which they were selected.
The More Difficult Question: What Happened Inside Reform Headquarters?
Perhaps the most politically significant element of the investigation was not the footage of councillors campaigning, but the recordings made inside Reform’s Westminster operation.
ITV reported that an undercover journalist worked in the party’s press office and recorded conversations between officials discussing allegations of racism involving party candidates.
In one case, the investigation focused on Chris Parry, a former Royal Navy officer who had been selected as Reform’s mayoral candidate in Hampshire. ITV reported that Parry had made online comments questioning the loyalty of Black and Asian politicians, including Labour MP David Lammy.
According to ITV’s recordings, Reform communications director Ed Sumner described Parry as racist and initially argued that he should be removed. However, Farage subsequently said that an apology should be sufficient. Sumner was recorded telling Farage that he was protecting Parry. <Cite refs={[“turn590194search1”]} />
Parry disputed the characterisation of his comments and urged people to consider their original context. He said his remarks related to reparations and what he regarded as failures by the police and government.
The episode raises a question that cannot be answered simply by arguing that undercover journalists were hostile to Reform. If senior officials believed a candidate’s comments were unacceptable, why did the party leader reach a different conclusion? What standards were applied, and why?
There may be circumstances in which an apology and a subsequent change in behaviour justify allowing a candidate to remain. But voters are entitled to expect a clear explanation of the criteria used to make that decision.
The investigation also recorded discussions about a councillor registered on a white supremacist dating website. Reform said the individual had been registered for a short period, denied suspending him and cited his explanation that the association was inadvertent. The councillor has said he abhors racism. <Cite refs={[“turn590194search1”]} />
These cases place the spotlight on the party’s internal decision-making, rather than solely on the conduct of individual councillors.
Reform Says It Has Strengthened Its Vetting
Farage promised in 2024 to professionalise Reform UK and improve the process for selecting candidates. At the time, he said that extremists and bigots would not have a place in the organisation.
Since then, Reform has expanded its local-government presence considerably. Growth brings organisational challenges: more candidates must be identified, more applications assessed and more elected representatives monitored.
Reform has told ITV that it has improved and prioritised vetting procedures. It has also acknowledged that some individuals who do not share the party’s values may initially pass through its checks, adding that this can happen in any organisation. The party said that investigations had begun where members or councillors had behaved inappropriately and that some suspensions had taken place. <Cite refs={[“turn590194news17″,”turn590194search1”]} />
Those statements establish the party’s declared position, but they do not settle whether its procedures are effective.
A robust system would examine applicants’ public statements, online activity and relevant affiliations. It would also establish clear expectations for conduct after selection and provide a process for dealing with credible complaints.
Vetting cannot predict every private conversation. Nor can it guarantee that a person who passes an initial screening will never make an offensive remark. But the recordings from inside headquarters raise a separate issue: how does the party respond when concerns become known?
If controversial conduct is treated mainly as a public-relations problem, the organisation risks prioritising the appearance of respectability over meaningful accountability. If allegations are investigated consistently and decisions are explained transparently, Reform can make a stronger case that it is addressing the issue.
Should ITV Investigate the Conservatives Too?
Farage’s demand that ITV scrutinise the Conservatives raises a broader debate about equal treatment in political journalism.
Political parties are often quick to accuse broadcasters of bias when investigations damage their public image. Sometimes those complaints concern legitimate issues, such as selective editing, insufficient context or a lack of comparable coverage. In other cases, the accusation can distract from evidence that deserves examination.
The appropriate standard should be consistent scrutiny, not identical investigations conducted at precisely the same time. A broadcaster may have evidence that justifies examining one organisation first, while another investigation may be warranted if credible material emerges elsewhere.
The Conservative Party’s record should not be beyond scrutiny. Neither should Labour’s, Reform’s or that of any other party. If an investigation uncovers evidence of misconduct involving a different organisation, it should be assessed on its own merits.
But a demand to investigate political rivals does not answer the questions raised by the Reform footage. Farage can reasonably challenge ITV’s methods and demand comparable standards without expecting those arguments to substitute for an explanation of his own party’s decisions.
The public interest is best served when investigations are judged by the evidence they uncover, the fairness of their methods and the opportunity given to those involved to respond.
A Political Crisis or an Organisational Test?
The ITV investigation creates risks for Reform, but its long-term significance will depend on what happens next.
The resignations of councillors show that the revelations have already had consequences. Further disciplinary decisions could follow as investigations continue. Yet departures alone cannot demonstrate that the underlying problems have been resolved.
Reform must decide how it will handle future complaints, whether previous vetting decisions need reviewing and how it will distinguish legitimate policy debate from discriminatory or threatening conduct.
Farage, meanwhile, must balance his argument that the party is being unfairly targeted with the need to reassure voters that its standards are meaningful. Simply saying that other parties should be investigated may resonate with supporters who distrust established institutions, but it leaves unanswered the specific questions raised by ITV’s recordings.
The controversy also illustrates a broader challenge facing political organisations that expand rapidly. A party may build its electoral support around dissatisfaction with existing institutions, but winning votes and maintaining a disciplined organisation require different skills. Candidate selection, internal oversight and transparent responses to misconduct become increasingly important as the number of elected representatives grows.
The Questions Voters Should Ask
The most useful way to assess this controversy is to separate three issues.
First, were ITV’s recordings authentic, fairly represented and presented with sufficient context? That is a legitimate question about journalistic standards.
Second, what do the recordings establish about the conduct of the individuals involved? That requires examining specific remarks and responses rather than making assumptions about every Reform supporter.
Third, how did Reform’s leadership respond, and what changes will it make to prevent similar problems? This is a question about the party’s own standards and accountability.
Those questions are related, but none automatically answers the others.
Farage is entitled to challenge the investigation and argue that political journalism should scrutinise all parties. ITV is entitled to defend an investigation undertaken in the public interest. Reform representatives are entitled to respond to allegations, and any disciplinary process should be fair.
Ultimately, the issue will not be settled by competing accusations of bias. It will be settled by the quality of the evidence, the fairness of the reporting and the transparency of the party’s response.
For Reform UK, the task is to demonstrate that its promises to exclude racism and extremism are reflected in its recruitment and disciplinary decisions. For ITV, the task is to maintain credible standards of evidence and context. And for voters, the central question is whether the available facts support the claims being made by either side.
Farage may succeed in keeping attention on the question of why ITV chose to investigate Reform. But the footage from inside the party’s own operation means another question remains unavoidable: what did the party know, how did it respond, and what will it do differently now?