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 Investigation into Reform UK: ‘They Should Spy on the Tories!’
Nigel Farage has launched a fierce attack on ITV following an undercover investigation that exposed racist and misogynistic remarks by people associated with Reform UK, accusing the broadcaster of targeting his party while failing to apply the same scrutiny to its political rivals.
The Reform UK leader argued that the investigation was part of a wider effort by what he described as the political establishment to undermine his movement. He insisted that the behaviour of a small number of individuals should not define an entire party and challenged journalists to conduct a similar investigation into Conservative councillors.
Speaking to the Daily Express on October 15, Farage suggested that ITV should send undercover investigators into the Conservative Party to discover whether similar attitudes existed among its members. He maintained that Reform was being subjected to an unusually intensive level of scrutiny because it posed a threat to the established political order. <Cite refs={[“turn768668search0”]}/>
But the controversy has created a difficult challenge for Farage. While he argues that the investigation unfairly singles out Reform, critics say the remarks captured on camera raise legitimate questions about the party’s candidate selection, disciplinary procedures and readiness for government.
The dispute has rapidly become a battle over two separate issues: whether investigative journalists have treated Reform fairly and whether the party is doing enough to prevent people expressing racist or discriminatory views from representing it.
Farage Turns His Fire on ITV
Farage did not attempt to hide his anger over the investigation, which involved journalists spending months examining people connected with Reform UK.
He criticised the resources devoted to the operation and questioned why the broadcaster had concentrated on his party rather than applying comparable scrutiny to other political organisations.
According to the Daily Express interview, Farage claimed that investigators had spoken to hundreds of people, attended by-elections and attempted to provoke conversations before finding what he described as a handful of individuals making unpleasant comments.
He argued that Reform had already acted against people whose conduct was unacceptable and rejected the suggestion that the revelations proved the party’s vetting procedures had failed.
His defence rested partly on the distinction between screening candidates before they enter a party and controlling what they might say afterwards.
No organisation, he argued, could guarantee that every member would behave appropriately in every private conversation. Even extensive background checks could not predict every future comment or prevent an individual from expressing views that contradicted the organisation’s stated principles.
Farage also questioned whether a political party should be judged by the worst behaviour of any individual who supports it.
That argument has become central to Reform’s response. The party has sought to portray the controversy as an attempt to discredit a wider political movement because of the statements and actions of a relatively small number of people.
However, the criticism facing Reform is not simply about whether every supporter can be controlled. It is also about the responsibilities of a party that selects candidates, gives them a political platform and asks voters to elect them to public office.
‘They Should Spy on the Tories’
The most attention-grabbing element of Farage’s response was his suggestion that investigators should turn their attention towards the Conservatives.
He argued that the worst individual exposed in the reporting had previously been associated with the Conservative Party and questioned why that person’s past political connections had not received the same undercover attention.
Farage suggested that an investigation involving a thousand Conservative councillors could uncover similarly objectionable comments. He maintained that prejudiced attitudes could be found across society and should not automatically be treated as evidence of a problem unique to Reform.
The argument raises a legitimate question about consistency in political reporting. If journalists believe that covert investigation is justified in the public interest, they should be prepared to explain why they choose particular subjects and how they determine whether similar investigations are warranted elsewhere.
But the existence of potential misconduct in another party would not, by itself, invalidate evidence collected about Reform UK.
The relevant questions remain whether the material was gathered responsibly, whether the recordings accurately represent what happened, whether the comments were presented in context and whether the people involved were given a fair opportunity to respond.
The same standards should apply regardless of political affiliation.
If a Conservative councillor, Labour activist or Reform candidate made comparable remarks, the public interest in examining the conduct would be broadly similar. One party’s failures would not excuse another’s.
Farage’s challenge may therefore increase pressure on broadcasters to demonstrate consistency, but it does not settle the questions raised by the investigation itself.
What Did ITV’s Investigation Reveal?
The undercover reporting examined the conduct of individuals connected with Reform UK during the period surrounding local elections and political campaigns.
Among the most disturbing material described in reports was footage involving Alan Feeney, a Reform councillor and deputy mayor of Solihull, who was recorded making hostile remarks about Asian families and expressing extreme views about immigration and the place of ethnic minorities in British society.
Other footage reportedly captured crude and misogynistic comments by Reform-linked figures about women.
The comments prompted criticism because they were not merely disagreements over immigration policy or the pace of demographic change. Some involved degrading descriptions of people based on their ethnicity, while others raised concerns about attitudes towards women.
There is an important distinction between arguing for stricter immigration controls and making racist statements about ethnic groups. Political parties are entitled to debate immigration, border security and integration, but those debates do not remove the responsibility to treat people as individuals rather than targets for racial hostility.
The allegations also raise questions about the role of elected representatives. Councillors make decisions affecting local communities, including public services, housing, planning and community relations. Voters can reasonably expect those seeking public office to conduct themselves in accordance with the responsibilities of that position.
Reform has faced scrutiny over whether its candidate checks are sufficiently rigorous and whether disciplinary action follows when unacceptable behaviour is uncovered.
The party has said it has improved its vetting procedures and has taken action against individuals whose behaviour was inconsistent with its values. It has also argued that some of the undercover methods used by ITV were deceptive and that the investigation failed to give adequate weight to its response.
Those claims and counterclaims should be assessed against the available evidence. The underlying remarks, the context in which they were made and the subsequent disciplinary decisions all matter when judging the seriousness of the controversy.
Reform’s Vetting System Under Pressure
Farage has insisted that Reform UK vets candidates more heavily than other political parties. Yet the investigation has renewed questions about how effective those checks are in practice.
Vetting can include reviewing public statements, examining a candidate’s political history, checking relevant records and assessing whether an individual is suitable to represent the party. However, no process can guarantee that a candidate will never make an offensive comment or behave inappropriately after being selected.
The challenge is therefore not simply to design a perfect screening process. It is to establish clear standards, respond quickly to credible complaints and apply disciplinary rules consistently.
A party seeking to expand rapidly faces additional organisational demands. Recruiting enough candidates to contest elections across numerous local authorities can be difficult, particularly for a movement that has grown from a comparatively small political organisation into a major electoral force.
Rapid growth does not excuse inadequate checks, but it can make the development of effective procedures more complicated.
Reform must demonstrate that its systems are capable of identifying serious concerns before candidates are selected wherever possible. When allegations emerge later, it must also show that investigations are fair, that decisions are based on evidence and that the consequences are proportionate.
Suspending or removing individuals may address immediate concerns, but repeated controversies can damage confidence in the selection process itself.
For Farage, this is a political problem as well as an administrative one. Reform’s appeal depends partly on its claim to challenge established political parties and offer a different approach to governing. Voters who believe the party is unable to maintain standards among its own representatives may question how it would manage a larger organisation.
The Wider Political Establishment Enters the Row
Farage’s attack has also placed the investigation within his broader argument that established institutions are hostile to Reform UK.
He has repeatedly presented his party as an outsider movement challenging the political consensus on immigration, public spending and national sovereignty. In that narrative, critical media coverage can be portrayed as an attempt to prevent the party from gaining influence.
That message can resonate with voters who already distrust political institutions or believe that their concerns have been ignored.
However, criticism from journalists, rival parties and members of the public is also a normal feature of democratic politics. Parties seeking public office can expect their candidates, funding, policies and internal procedures to face scrutiny.
The essential question is whether that scrutiny is accurate, proportionate and conducted in the public interest.
Undercover journalism is particularly controversial because it can involve deception and the recording of conversations without the knowledge of those involved. Such methods require careful justification. Journalists must consider whether the information could reasonably be obtained by less intrusive means and whether the public interest outweighs the potential harm.
At the same time, covert reporting can reveal conduct that would otherwise remain hidden, especially when individuals behave differently in private than they do in public.
The fact that a broadcaster used undercover methods does not automatically make its findings reliable or unreliable. The methods, evidence and context need to be examined.
Farage’s allegations of unfair treatment therefore deserve to be distinguished from the separate question of whether the material published by ITV was accurate and significant.
Why the Conservatives Are Central to Farage’s Defence
The Conservative Party occupies an important place in Farage’s argument because Reform is competing for many of the same voters.
Both parties appeal to sections of the electorate concerned about immigration, taxation, public services and Britain’s political direction. Farage has repeatedly argued that the Conservatives failed to deliver on promises made while in government, while Conservative leaders have questioned Reform’s experience and readiness for office.
In this competitive environment, allegations about candidate conduct can have implications beyond the individuals directly involved.
Farage’s suggestion that journalists should investigate Conservative councillors is an attempt to challenge the idea that Reform should be treated as uniquely vulnerable to misconduct scandals. It also shifts attention towards the records of political rivals.
Yet the most useful comparison would require evidence gathered using comparable standards. Investigating one thousand Conservative councillors, as Farage suggested, would not automatically establish that the parties had identical problems. The findings would depend on the methods used, the sample selected and the conduct uncovered.
Nor would evidence of misconduct in the Conservative Party settle whether Reform’s own disciplinary procedures were adequate.
Voters deserve scrutiny that examines each party on its own record while applying consistent standards across the political system.
A Test of Farage’s Leadership
The controversy presents Farage with a choice about how to respond to criticism of his party.
He can continue to emphasise what he sees as the unfairness of the investigation and argue that the media should scrutinise political rivals with equal intensity. That approach reinforces his broader message that Reform is fighting an established political system resistant to change.
Alternatively, he can make the investigation an opportunity to demonstrate that his party has clear expectations for candidates and will act decisively when credible evidence shows those expectations have been breached.
The two approaches are not mutually exclusive. Farage can question journalistic methods while also acknowledging that racist and misogynistic remarks by people representing his party require serious attention.
Indeed, a response that addresses both questions may offer voters a clearer basis for judging the party than a debate focused solely on the motives of broadcasters.
The public will also want to know whether disciplinary measures are consistent, whether candidates receive meaningful guidance and whether the party can prevent similar controversies from recurring.
These are practical questions about leadership and organisation, not simply arguments about media bias.
The Questions That Remain
The ITV investigation has exposed a dispute that reaches beyond one broadcaster or one political party. It concerns the balance between investigative journalism and privacy, the standards expected of elected representatives and the responsibility of political leaders to maintain discipline within their organisations.
Farage is entitled to challenge what he considers selective scrutiny. Other parties should face serious investigation when credible evidence suggests misconduct, and broadcasters should be able to explain their decisions and methods.
But demands for equal treatment cannot replace an examination of the evidence already published.
The comments attributed to Reform-linked individuals raise legitimate concerns that must be addressed on their own merits. At the same time, the investigation’s methods and presentation should be open to scrutiny rather than accepted or rejected purely because of the political consequences.
For Reform UK, the immediate challenge is to show that its stated opposition to racism and misogyny is reflected in the people it selects and the action it takes when standards are breached.
For ITV, the challenge is to demonstrate that its reporting meets the standards of accuracy, fairness and public interest expected of investigative journalism.
And for voters, the central issue is whether the parties seeking their support can explain their policies, take responsibility for their representatives and respond to legitimate questions without allowing every controversy to become a battle over political loyalties.
Farage’s call for journalists to investigate the Conservatives may ensure that the argument continues. But the lasting test will be whether all political parties are held to consistent standards—and whether those who fail to meet them are held accountable.