The Reform activist also said you cannot be a Muslim and British. (Image: GETTY)
Reform UK has suspended a would-be parliamentary candidate who was caught saying you can’t be a Muslim and British. Jason Powell also told an undercover reporter that asylum seekers should be put in “concentration camps”. His comments were recorded as part of an investigation by ITV, which has already seen Nigel Farage‘s outfit accused of “appalling behaviour” and “extreme racism”. Mr Powell was filmed making the remarks at the “Farage Fest” party held after Mr Farage was re-elected MP for Clacton.
In footage due to be broadcast on Sunday, the activist and aspiring MP describes himself as “pretty hardline about Islam”. He says: “If a Muslim’s prepared to de-convert, I’m happy.
“But if they want to remain faithful to Islam, then this would be – I would have disagreements – especially with, um, I mean, as far as I understand, (Reform home affairs spokesman) Zia Yusuf is a Muslim… To me… you cannot be a Muslim and British… it’s like oil and water.”
On people crossing the Channel in small boats, the same activist says: “In the first week of election, build concentration camps, and everyone who comes across on the Channel, you’re in there.”
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.
Asked to confirm if Mr Powell has been suspended, a Reform spokesman 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.”
The spokesman said no further action would be taken against Reform councillors, Adam Parkins and David Kerr, who told an undercover ITV reporter they would execute or “machine gun down” grooming gang members. He said: “Cllrs Parkins and Kerr were giving their own personal opinions on the death penalty for members of child rape gangs in what they believed was a private conversation. We will not be taking further action against them.”
Nigel Farage’s Reform UK has suspended a would-be MP after he said you can’t be Muslim and British (Image: Getty)
Excerpts from ITV’s investigation released earlier in the week include councillors and candidates within Reform using racist language. In one clip, black children are referred to as “animals”, while in another, a Reform member says his area has become “infested” with Asian families.
In a separate clip, Reform MP Sarah Pochin describes the party as “chauvinistic”, adding: “They just exclude you if you’re a woman.”
Mr Farage, speaking earlier in the week, said while Reform carries out vetting, it can’t vet people for what they say in the future.
He added: “I put it to you, if you went and spoke to hundreds of Conservative councillors and tried to provoke them, you would find all sorts of things and all sorts of comments said.”
In a statement to ITV, Mr Farage’s outfit said: “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. However good the vetting, one cannot vet a future comment.
“There is no room for racism in Reform UK. We always respect due process of investigations, and whilst these are ongoing, it would not be appropriate to comment on individual cases.”
Labour Party Chair Bridget Phillipson said Mr Farage’s response to the revelations showed he was “completely unfit to lead”. She said: “Bad apples don’t fall far from the tree.
“The sleaze, scandals and appalling revelations of racism and rank misogyny piling up by the day go right to the top of Reform UK. Nigel Farage is incapable of taking responsibility and getting his house in order because he himself shares culpability.”
Reform UK Suspends Activist Who Called for Migrant Concentration Camps
Controversy Deepens for Nigel Farage’s Party
Reform UK has suspended activist Jason Powell after undercover footage emerged showing him calling for migrants arriving across the English Channel to be placed in what he described as “concentration camps”. The revelations have intensified scrutiny of Nigel Farage’s party, its candidate-vetting procedures and its approach to immigration. <Cite refs={[“turn326128news13″,”turn326128news3”]}/>
The comments were recorded by an undercover reporter working for ITV News during a year-long investigation into Reform UK. Powell, who had applied to become a Reform parliamentary candidate, was filmed at an event celebrating volunteers who had helped Farage secure his election victory in Clacton.
During the conversation, Powell proposed detaining everyone who arrived by small boat and demanding that they identify their country of origin. He suggested that those who refused to provide the information should remain detained indefinitely. He also claimed that Muslims could not simultaneously be Muslim and British, comparing the two identities to “oil and water”. <Cite refs={[“turn326128news13″,”turn326128search8”]}/>
The footage has created a difficult moment for Reform UK as the party seeks to establish itself as a major political force. Immigration is central to its political message, but the incident has raised questions about the distinction between advocating stricter border controls and promoting policies that could violate fundamental rights.
Powell’s recorded remarks were his own statements and should not automatically be treated as official Reform UK policy. Nevertheless, his association with the party has prompted renewed demands for greater accountability from its leadership.
Why the Suspension Matters
Reform confirmed that investigations had been opened into members, activists and councillors whose behaviour was considered inappropriate. The party said there was no room for racism within its organisation and emphasised that disciplinary procedures must follow due process. <Cite refs={[“turn326128news13″,”turn326128search10”]}/>
Powell’s suspension is significant because he was seeking to become a parliamentary candidate. Although he had reportedly claimed to have passed vetting, his status as an aspiring candidate should not be confused with having been formally selected to contest a seat.
Political parties have a responsibility to assess candidates before allowing them to represent the organisation publicly. Vetting can include reviewing past statements, professional backgrounds, public conduct and other relevant information. However, no screening process can predict every comment an individual might make in the future.
Farage has previously argued that it is impossible to vet people for remarks they make after the screening process. Reform has also said that its vetting procedures have been strengthened, while acknowledging that unsuitable individuals can sometimes pass through its checks. <Cite refs={[“turn326128search7″,”turn326128search10”]}/>
The challenge for the party is to demonstrate that its procedures are effective, that serious allegations are investigated fairly and that disciplinary standards are applied consistently.
A suspension is an immediate response, but it does not necessarily resolve wider questions about recruitment, oversight and the political culture within an organisation.
Immigration Policy and the Limits of Detention
The Channel crossing issue remains a major subject of political debate in Britain. Successive governments have faced pressure to reduce dangerous crossings, disrupt smuggling networks, process asylum claims more efficiently and remove people who have no legal right to remain in the country.
Reform UK has advocated substantially tougher immigration controls. Its proposals have included expanded deportation powers and a dedicated command to coordinate removals. Supporters argue that stronger enforcement is necessary to restore confidence in the immigration system, while critics question the cost, practicality and humanitarian consequences of the party’s approach.
Powell’s proposal, however, went beyond the general demand for tougher enforcement. The suggestion that every person arriving by small boat should be placed in concentration camps raises fundamental concerns about detention conditions, legal safeguards and individual assessment.
People who arrive in Britain by irregular routes do not all have the same legal circumstances. Some may be seeking international protection; others may have claims that are refused or may have no lawful basis to stay. Their cases require appropriate legal procedures rather than assumptions based solely on the method of arrival.
Immigration detention must have a lawful basis and be subject to appropriate safeguards. People held in detention may need access to legal advice, healthcare and procedures through which they can challenge decisions. Indefinite detention without meaningful review raises particularly serious legal and human-rights concerns.
The language used by Powell also carries a historical burden. “Concentration camps” is associated with mass detention and persecution, making it a deeply charged term when applied to a proposed policy for migrants and asylum seekers.
The controversy therefore highlights why discussions about border security must also address the conditions under which state power can be exercised.
The Controversy Over Muslims and British Identity
Powell’s comments about Muslims have added another dimension to the story. He argued that being Muslim and British was incompatible, a claim that excludes an entire religious community from belonging to the country.
British citizenship does not require a person to abandon Islam or any other lawful religious belief. Muslims are part of Britain’s population and contribute to its communities, businesses, public services and cultural life.
Political disagreements about religious practices, integration, immigration or national identity can be discussed without claiming that an entire religious group cannot be British. Powell’s statement crossed into a sweeping judgement about people based on their faith.
The remarks have consequently raised concerns about the standards expected of those seeking to represent voters. Parliamentary candidates are likely to encounter constituents from a wide range of backgrounds, and their public statements can influence whether those constituents feel represented.
Reform UK has said that it does not tolerate racism. The party’s handling of this incident will therefore be judged not only on the suspension itself but also on how it explains and enforces its standards.
A Wider ITV Investigation Raises Further Questions
Powell’s remarks were part of ITV’s documentary investigation, Undercover: A Year in Reform, which examined conversations involving party activists, councillors and other figures associated with the organisation.
The investigation also recorded two Reform councillors in west London making violent statements about people accused of involvement in grooming gangs. Adam Parkins spoke about carrying out executions, while David Kerr discussed lining up offenders and shooting them. The remarks prompted further questions about the behaviour of elected representatives and the party’s response. <Cite refs={[“turn326128news13″,”turn326128search8”]}/>
Reform’s position has been that people must be treated according to the circumstances of their individual cases and that due process should be followed. The party has also disputed aspects of the undercover investigation and said it was pursuing legal action against ITV and the production company. <Cite refs={[“turn326128news3″,”turn326128search10”]}/>
These developments need to be distinguished carefully. Powell’s suspension does not automatically determine the status of other individuals shown in the documentary, and statements made by one activist cannot simply be attributed to every party member.
Nevertheless, multiple controversies can intensify scrutiny of an organisation’s internal culture. Voters may reasonably ask how candidates are selected, how complaints are investigated and whether disciplinary action is consistent.
The issue is not merely whether a party can distance itself from an individual after controversial remarks become public. It is also whether the party can demonstrate that its procedures are capable of identifying and addressing serious concerns.
Farage Faces Questions About His Promise to Professionalise Reform
Farage has previously pledged to professionalise Reform UK and remove what he described as unsuitable individuals. The latest revelations have revived questions about how effectively the party has delivered on that promise.
For a growing political organisation, candidate selection is an important test of its ability to move from a protest movement towards a party capable of governing. Recruiting people who can represent constituents responsibly requires more than finding individuals who agree with the party’s policies.
It also requires clear standards for conduct, a process for checking candidates’ backgrounds and an effective response when evidence of misconduct emerges.
Reform’s rapid expansion makes those tasks particularly important. A party that recruits many new activists and prospective candidates may face difficulties maintaining consistent oversight across local organisations. That does not excuse inappropriate behaviour, but it helps explain why procedures and accountability matter as the organisation grows.
Farage has argued that no vetting system can anticipate every future statement. That point is true in a limited sense, but it does not remove the responsibility to investigate credible concerns, enforce standards and explain decisions to the public.
The party’s response will be judged against its stated commitment to excluding racism and ensuring that its representatives meet appropriate standards.
Political Reactions and Public Confidence
The controversy has provided political opponents with an opportunity to challenge Reform’s claims about its suitability for government. Labour Party chair Bridget Phillipson criticised the party following the wider ITV revelations, arguing that the repeated incidents raised questions about leadership and accountability. <Cite refs={[“turn326128news13″,”turn326128search7”]}/>
Reform has rejected the broader characterisation of its organisation and says that investigations and suspensions demonstrate its willingness to act where necessary.
The competing claims underline the need to separate verified evidence from political interpretation. Powell’s remarks were recorded and reported by ITV; the party’s disciplinary response has also been reported. Whether these events demonstrate a wider organisational problem is a broader question that requires examination of the evidence, the response to individual cases and the effectiveness of the party’s procedures.
For voters, the central concern is whether candidates and elected representatives can be trusted to exercise public authority responsibly. That question applies to all political parties, regardless of their positions on immigration or other contentious issues.
Conclusion: A Test of Standards and Accountability
Reform UK’s suspension of Jason Powell has placed its immigration policies and candidate-selection procedures under renewed scrutiny. Powell was recorded advocating concentration camps for Channel migrants and claiming that Muslims could not be British. The party subsequently suspended him while an investigation was under way. <Cite refs={[“turn326128news3″,”turn326128search7”]}/>
The controversy should not be mistaken for an official announcement that Reform UK intends to establish concentration camps. It does, however, raise serious questions about the people seeking to represent the party and the safeguards needed to ensure that political campaigning remains compatible with legal and democratic responsibilities.
Britain faces genuine policy challenges concerning asylum processing, border enforcement and dangerous Channel crossings. Those challenges deserve serious discussion based on evidence, workable proposals and respect for the law.
The public debate must also recognise that people arriving by small boat have different circumstances and legal claims, and that religious identity does not determine whether someone can be British.
For Farage and Reform, the immediate issue is how the party handles the investigation and demonstrates that its stated standards are applied consistently. For the wider political system, the episode is a reminder that immigration policy and political accountability cannot be separated from the basic rights and dignity of the people affected.