Reform UK leader Nigel Farage did not watch the Budget in the Commons (Image: Getty)
Nigel Farage has revealed he did not watch the Budget in the Commons to avoid a “physical altercation”.
The Reform UK leader said he clashed with another MP at the State Opening of Parliament and feared the same thing would happen today after his prayer card saving his seat in the chamber was removed.
Asked why he was not in the Commons as Chancellor John Healey made his statement, Mr Farage told a Reform press conference: “At the state opening of Parliament, I got involved … I didn’t want to … but I got involved in a physical altercation with an MP in the chamber. I didn’t make a fuss about it, I didn’t complain, but I could see given that my prayer card had been removed, I was heading towards another physical altercation. Just sometimes it’s better to avoid conflict. That’s one reason.
Chancellor John Healey delivered his first Budget (Image: BBC)
“Second reason is actually I sat going through the Budget with our team of economists in the office, so I actually had the time to go through it line by line.”
He added: “So it was actually more useful for me to sit in the office with a team of economists around me. But I was going to go to PMQs, but I could see potential conflict.
“And being a very quiet, shy, modest kind of person, I decided to give it a wide berth.”
Mr Farage also described the Budget as “a retail Budget aimed at an early general election”. The Reform UK leader added: “It doesn’t overall do very much, but it attempts to please a very large number of people.”
In his Budget, Mr Healey announced that millions of households will receive £100 to help with soaring energy bills and high street firms will get a tax break.
A spokesperson for the House of Commons said a prayer card was removed because it did not display the relevant information needed to reserve a place.
The spokesperson said: “There are clear and long-established arrangements for members to reserve their own seats in the chamber using prayer cards displaying a valid date stamp.
“Today, a prayer card placed on a seat did not display a valid date stamp and was removed in line with the usual chamber protocol.”
Nigel Farage Misses Budget After Being Involved in ‘Physical Altercation’ in Commons
Nigel Farage has found himself at the centre of a fresh political controversy after revealing that he decided to miss Chancellor John Healey’s Budget speech in the House of Commons because he feared becoming involved in another physical confrontation with a fellow MP.
The Reform UK leader’s absence initially raised questions after he failed to take his place in Parliament during one of the most important political events of the year. However, Farage subsequently explained that a previous confrontation during the State Opening of Parliament had influenced his decision to stay away.
The controversy quickly escalated when Liberal Democrat MP Caroline Voaden accused Farage of physically pushing her during the earlier incident. The allegation has been strongly disputed by Reform UK, creating another heated disagreement between the two political parties.
The incident has attracted widespread attention because it involves not only the behaviour of elected representatives but also the procedures governing parliamentary business and the political atmosphere inside Westminster.
1. Why Did Nigel Farage Miss the Budget?
Nigel Farage was notably absent when Chancellor John Healey delivered his first Budget statement in the House of Commons on 28 October 2026.
The Reform UK leader later explained that his decision was partly connected to an earlier confrontation during the State Opening of Parliament in May.
According to Farage, his parliamentary seat reservation card, commonly known as a prayer card, had been removed before the Budget proceedings.
These cards allow MPs to reserve seats in the Commons chamber during important parliamentary occasions when there are insufficient seats for every member.
Farage claimed that the removal of his card created the possibility of another confrontation.
Speaking at a press conference following the Budget, he said:
“At the State Opening of Parliament, I got involved – I didn’t want to – but I got involved in a physical altercation with an MP in the chamber.”
He continued by explaining that he did not want to repeat the experience.
Farage added that he had decided to avoid potential conflict and instead spend time examining the Budget alongside Reform UK’s economic advisers.
He also suggested that reviewing the Chancellor’s proposals line by line with economists was a more productive use of his time.
However, his explanation immediately attracted further questions about what had actually happened during the previous confrontation.
2. Caroline Voaden Accuses Farage of Pushing Her
The controversy intensified after Liberal Democrat MP Caroline Voaden publicly identified herself as the woman involved in the May incident.
Voaden, who represents South Devon, gave her account of the confrontation and accused Farage of grabbing her arm or shoulder and pushing her aside while attempting to pass through the parliamentary chamber.
She explained that the incident happened during the State Opening of Parliament on 13 May 2026.
According to her account, Farage told her to let him pass. She responded that he should wait his turn like everyone else.
Voaden then alleged that Farage grabbed her from behind and pushed her towards a colleague or the wall.
She said she was shocked and angry about the incident, arguing that such behaviour was unacceptable in any workplace, particularly inside the House of Commons.
The Liberal Democrat MP also claimed that she had complained to parliamentary authorities and raised the matter with the Speaker.
She said she was still waiting for an apology.
These allegations have added a new dimension to the controversy because Farage had previously described the incident without identifying the MP involved.
Importantly, Voaden’s account represents an allegation rather than an independently established finding of wrongdoing.
3. Reform UK Rejects the Allegations
Reform UK has strongly disputed Voaden’s version of events.
A party source described the allegations as untrue and accused Liberal Democrat MPs of behaving aggressively towards Farage.
The party also suggested that the confrontation had been misrepresented for political purposes.
Reform UK’s Treasury spokesperson Robert Jenrick was questioned about the controversy following the Budget.
Jenrick dismissed the political argument as an example of what he considered unnecessary Westminster drama.
He argued that Reform politicians were more interested in addressing the country’s economic problems than becoming involved in parliamentary disputes.
His comments demonstrate the party’s attempt to redirect attention towards the Budget and wider economic issues.
However, the disagreement between the two parties has continued, with Liberal Democrats insisting that Farage should address the allegations directly.
The conflicting accounts mean that the precise circumstances of the May incident remain disputed.
4. The Prayer Card Dispute Raises Further Questions
Another important part of the controversy concerns the parliamentary seating arrangements.
Farage suggested that his prayer card had been removed, contributing to his decision not to attend the Budget in person.
However, the House of Commons administration provided a different explanation.
A Commons spokesperson confirmed that there were established procedures allowing MPs to reserve seats using prayer cards displaying a valid date stamp.
The spokesperson explained that Farage’s card did not contain the required valid date stamp and had therefore been removed in accordance with normal parliamentary arrangements.
This clarification is important because it suggests that the removal of the card was an administrative matter rather than necessarily an attempt by another MP to prevent Farage from attending.
The dispute has therefore developed into two separate questions: whether Farage was involved in an inappropriate physical confrontation in May and whether his absence from the Budget was justified by the circumstances surrounding his seat reservation.
5. Robert Jenrick Defends Farage
Robert Jenrick has also attempted to defend his party leader amid the growing controversy.
When questioned about the allegations, Jenrick criticised what he described as petty arguments between politicians in Westminster.
He suggested that Reform UK wanted to focus on issues affecting ordinary British people rather than becoming distracted by personal disagreements.
However, the controversy has proved difficult to separate from the wider political debate.
For Reform UK, Farage is the party’s most recognisable figure and central political leader. Consequently, allegations involving his behaviour attract considerable public attention.
The party must also demonstrate that its representatives are prepared to address questions about conduct and accountability rather than simply dismissing criticism as political attacks.
Meanwhile, the Liberal Democrats have argued that the incident should not be ignored simply because it happened inside Parliament.
6. Farage Launches an Attack on the Chancellor’s Budget
Despite missing the parliamentary Budget statement, Farage delivered a detailed response during a press conference alongside Robert Jenrick.
He described the Budget as a retail-style announcement designed to appeal to voters ahead of a possible general election.
The Reform leader argued that the Chancellor had introduced several measures that appeared popular individually but failed to address Britain’s underlying economic problems.
One announcement involved a £100 payment intended to help millions of households cope with energy costs.
Farage questioned whether a one-off payment could provide meaningful long-term relief for families struggling with expensive electricity and heating.
He also criticised additional taxation on gambling businesses, warning that higher taxes could damage the horse-racing industry and encourage betting activity to move offshore.
Another significant issue involved Ukraine.
Farage expressed concern about the scale of the financial and military support being promised to Kyiv, arguing that the government needed to ensure that British money was properly accounted for and spent effectively.
He did not reject Britain’s support for Ukraine outright but questioned whether sufficient safeguards existed to prevent corruption.
The Reform leader also discussed cryptocurrency taxation, reiterating his support for a proposed 10 per cent tax rate on cryptocurrency gains as a way of encouraging activity within a regulated financial system.
These comments demonstrated that, despite missing the parliamentary event, Farage wanted to establish Reform UK’s position on the Chancellor’s economic programme.
7. A Wider Political Battle Between Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats
The dispute has also highlighted the increasingly confrontational relationship between Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats.
Both parties have different political priorities and compete for voters who are dissatisfied with the traditional political establishment.
Farage has built Reform UK’s support around immigration control, national sovereignty, lower taxation and criticism of Westminster politics.
The Liberal Democrats, meanwhile, have focused on issues including public services, political accountability and their opposition to several Reform UK policies.
The disagreement involving Voaden could therefore become another source of tension between the parties.
However, parliamentary representatives are expected to maintain professional standards regardless of their political differences.
The House of Commons is an institution in which elected representatives must be able to debate difficult issues without intimidation or inappropriate physical behaviour.
Any serious allegations should therefore be examined fairly, with both sides given an opportunity to provide evidence and explain their accounts.
Conclusion
Nigel Farage’s decision to miss Chancellor John Healey’s Budget speech has developed into a significant political controversy following his revelation that he feared another physical confrontation in the House of Commons.
The situation became more complicated when Liberal Democrat MP Caroline Voaden accused him of grabbing and pushing her during the State Opening of Parliament in May 2026.
Reform UK has rejected her account, while parliamentary authorities have confirmed that Farage’s prayer card was removed because it did not display a valid date stamp.
The conflicting accounts have left important questions about the earlier incident unresolved.
In my opinion, the most important issue is ensuring that allegations involving elected representatives are investigated fairly and transparently. Political disagreements should never replace evidence, and neither side should be judged solely on statements made during press conferences.
The controversy also highlights the need for MPs to maintain appropriate standards of conduct inside Parliament.
Ultimately, Farage’s absence from the Budget may have been intended to avoid another confrontation, but it has instead created a new political dispute involving Reform UK and the Liberal Democrats.
As the debate continues, attention will remain focused on the competing accounts of the May incident, the response from parliamentary authorities and whether Farage will directly address the allegations made against him.