While a cautious Labour government is worrying about former Labour voters who moved to Reform UK at the General Election and Conservatives are split between those who see the Faragists as friends and those who see them as enemies., Liberal Democrats have a clear moral responsibility to fight them hard and defeat them.
Much has been written about the exploitation of grievances fuelling far right advances on both sides of the Atlantic and within the EU. While we have to take seriously the hurts many are experiencing and the sense of lostness in the face of collapsing public services which threatens civil society, we have to overcome the divisive hate-mongers. Labour say this is their mission but they have strange ways of showing it. So it’s up to us.
In the pre-Christmas weeks the Yorkshire and the Humber Region explicitly encouraged members and supporters to get stuck into a run of local by-elections saying “Reform is spreading divisive rhetoric and we’re working hard to offer a better vision for our communities”.
There was an interesting sequence of results.
- On 28th November we had a shock gain in Woodhouse, Sheffield with a 10 vote margin over Reform and Labour pushed into third place.
- Also on 28th a strong Lib Dem defence in York gave us three times the vote of the Tory in second place. Reform came third with Labour fourth.
- On 12th December Reform took a seat from Labour in Merseyside (with no Lib Dem candidate). Meanwhile in West and South Yorkshire Reform failed to take seats in Featherstone, Wakefield and Dodworth, Barnsley. Labour held Featherstone but a large increase in the Lib Dem vote pushed Reform into third place. In Dodworth a strong Lib Dem hold secured twice as many votes as Reform with Labour in third place.
In some respects we have been here before. In 2006 the BNP came within a hundred votes of taking the Eccleshill, Bradford seat, which a few years later I was to represent on the City Council. We were determined to push them back. In 2007 it was not difficult to persuade voters that the Lib Dems were best placed to defeat the far right and we had a good track record to show that we could offer something much, much better. With people who usually voted for other parties coalescing around the Lib Dem candidate we had our biggest ever margin of victory. We secured nearly twice as many votes as the BNP in second place with Labour third.
Taking on the far right is always involves sheer bloody hard work. But at least we can be confident that what Lib Dems do normally up and down the country is part of that. We can also be secure in our own values. The traditional left/right spectrum of political positions is not always useful. It is possible to see a linear spectrum which places us at the opposite polarity to the populists. In the UK context they hate internationalist, anti-Brexit political activists who defend gender equality, the rights of minorities, the rule of law (including international law), local government and decentralisation as opposed to the destruction of the public realm. They know who we are!
Meanwhile we should not be afraid of exploiting the naivety and ignorance within Reform UK when these features rise to the surface. When I was telling on the doorstep of a polling station in Dodworth on 12th December a rather confused couple wanted me to cross out the numbers they had previously given me, complaining to the Presiding Officer. My suspicions were confirmed when the Reform candidate turned up to tell me I had no right to be there. He got the Presiding Officer to ring up the Elections Office who gave the right response to his complaint. On leaving he threatened to send a Reform member to stand next to me – to which I responded “Yes, I’d welcome that”. He was not really having a good day. He didn’t enjoy the count either!
* Geoff Reid is a retired Methodist minister and Bradford City Councillor 2010-2022 who now lives in Barnsley.
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Weekly Road Report - West End Ward #dundeewestend
Remembering Don Cupitt and his television series The Sea of Faith
How to improve the regulation of political polling - The Week in Polls
Why the government are getting it wrong on local government reorganisation
Rwanda scheme ICT costs revealed
John Mc
Simon R
David Evans
David Raw
27 Comments
Jeff, very interesting article.
Research on Reform voters shows they are very concerned about the state of public services and corruption in government. These are concerns shared by our party and we should go all out to win over these voters.
Labelling reform voters far right isn’t going to work. The rise of populist parties is a failure of progressive politics . Towns across the UK have seen considerable demographic changes & many people are uncomfortable that it’s gone way too far . You couple that with failing services and you get voters who are no longer afraid to move away from mainstream political parties. We have record immigration, & yet a economy that’s flatlineing. As Starmer said the Tories were drunk on immigration, it’s not sustainable in the long term. Progressives need to realise that reality pretty quickly.
Good article. Left and right are simplistic categories.
I note the Treasurer of Reform suggests he has other millionaire/billionaires supporting Reform. Please can we have their names please so we can leaflet my ex Labour ward with the question: ‘Who’s side are Musk and numerous billionaires on? Their own side not yours.’
Reform leadership are in favour of cutting the state and Thatcherite economics: their preferences are far removed from those of their voters. We need to hammer that home to potential Reform voters.
There is precedent for attacking and winning against reform. The Late Tony Greaves produced very hard hitting anti BNP leaflets in Burnley and we won. Gordon Birtwistle our former MP is excellent at persuading BNP/Reform potential voters to think again. There is already expertise in our party. We need to harness it
I’ve posted in here before about this and completely agree with this article. There’s an element to some Reform voters that is economically social democrat and localist. We have a way in with them, even when we don’t agree about social and international politics.
I agree with @Craig Levene. Reform are dreadful in many ways, with their cosying up to Trump, their playing down of climate change, and apparent sympathies of some Reform figures for Russia and Putin particularly worrying. But they are not the BNP, and they are not far right. They have been so successful in part because they have listened to and responded to the concerns of many voters on issues like immigration where it seems we prefer to ignore those voters. I totally agree with @Geoff on the need to combat Reform and I’m sure we can get some way by heavy campaigning. But unless we are willing to start listening to the concerns of those who support Reform, and not keep patronising/insulting those people by dismissing their worries as far right, I doubt we will ever be able to fully ‘defeat’ Reform.
Thing is, people don’t generally vote for Reform because they like their policies. It’s more of a mutiny against the established political settlement, where”whoever you vote for, the government gets in” . The policy choices of the current Labour government look like continuations of the Tory policies of the previous government with very minor differences. I believe the large vote for LDs in 2010 was also such a mutiny – but Clegg and Alexander blew it. Also Brexit.
“Concerns like immigration”. We probably need to understand people’s concerns more deeply. Immigration may be the scapegoat and the first thing people say, but when you listen to more of what people are worried about, it’s “can I get a GP appointment/dentistry/ ambulance when I need one?” cost of rent, fuel and food, homelessness, the feeling that everything is broken : prisons, courts, potholes, rail, driving tests, etc etc. Both Tories & Labour support the “immigration is bad” rhetoric, while encouraging immigration for care workers, NHS staff, farm labour and so on.
I would say focusing on economic democracy (more co-operatives, workplaces allowing workers to have a stake in management) is important for empowering the working-class who have increasingly felt abandoned since the financial crash in 2008. Furthermore, the political centre has abandoned a sense of national identity for multicultural ideals that is being found and exploited by far-right nativist parties – we must retake the narrative and build on a positive vision. From an immigrant household, I realise that being patriotic has been frowned upon, leading to an absence of pride in place and community. This should be reversed by entrenching an understanding that British values are inextricably liberal.
I am not sure if I agree with Jenny, whilst they say about services etc, I think it is more about seeing their country change culturally.
Also I do think that we as liberals, although well meaning, sometimes don’t help the cause.
For example I think it is more harmful that helpful to say that the settled community must change and adapt to the needs of the incoming community. Most people will think that it that the overwhelming onus is on the incoming community to adapt and assimilate into the culture of the settled community rather than the other way around.
Trying to force the settled community to change to adapt to the needs of the incoming community will just lead to pushback from the electorate. The worst examples being when people are asked to change a long running tradition because it “offends” the incoming community. That leads to the “winterval” debacles which although rare, and becoming rarer, do nothing but help Reform.
People will naturally push back if they think their way of life is under attack. Most people are “somewheres” most liberals are “anywheres”, we need to understand this.
I’m not so sure about the assertion that most liberals are anywheres. A recent trip back to my native Lincolnshire has confirmed that, while it will always be special, I’m definitely a Tynesider now (whether I count as adopted is up to Tyneside rather than me). Could I live somewhere else? Maybe. Would it feel like home? Not easily. I’ve found my somewhere on the third attempt. There are however so many things that transcend my somewhere. To my mind, the liberal perspective is one that recognises common needs, interests and problems while accepting that different somewheres need different solutions and approaches – sometimes multiple ones for the same place. The ‘duty to integrate’ argument depends on what one means by integrate – I’ve never heard a specific definition that I’m happy with (which doesn’t necessarily mean there isn’t one), but I’m inclined to be queasy about the idea that anyone, whether they come from round the corner or around the world, has to dilute who they are for the comfort of the collective, subject of course to basic civility and the Harm Principle.
I agree with the sentiment of this article.We must demonstrate that we have the better political position than reform. We have sound sensible policies and council members that are doing well in councils around the country. We have MPs that are able to challenge the government where required. The one thing I have noticed about Reform they have no policies and Farage spends most of the time criticising others without offering an alternative.
This is a good article. We can waste to many words analysing the issues. Simple fact is Reform is a right party with a loud mouth bigot as it’s leader. They scapegoat one section of humanity and peddle fear and hatred. We need to take them on before they grow roots. It has always been this I fought my first election in 1976 in London GLC contest. It was not an easy time for Liberalism but it was essential that the National Front were kept in Check. In my seat that was achieved. The task is the same in 2025 in every electoral contest the right has to be taken on by voice of Liberalism which is now found within the Liberal Democrats.
@slamdac
I agree that ‘Winterval’ was a bad idea and disagreed with it profoundly, but I find it quite disingenuous of people (in general) to complain about cultural changes when a large number of those societal changes have been inflicted by the Americanisation of our society. The fast food culture, the coffee shop, Black Friday are easy and quick examples. None of these are to do with immigration. Further, regarding the term Christmas, I am hearing more and more, the term ‘Happy Holidays’, which is again of American origin. Why is this never complained about? It should be pointed out to people gently, but repeatedly and firmly where exactly many cultural changes have come from.
Americanisation is a voluntary process. I’m talking about when well meaning people take offence on behalf of an incoming community and try to force the settled community to change to stop offending the incoming community. Winterval is an example, it makes the incoming group seem intolerant and is completely counterproductive.
The best way to beat reform. Is to make it clear that people are welcome, but only if they accept our laws and customs/culture. They don’t have to practice our customs/culture but they need to accept them.
If they can’t do that then they are not welcome.
@slamdac
I think we will have to disagree somewhat. Who were the decision-makers regarding ‘winterval’? It was a council decision basically save money and effort, rather than an incoming community imposition. Part of my issue, as I alluded to earlier, is the fact that such narratives are not challenged. Rather than people (in general) guessing what communities ‘seem’ like, it would be better surely to find out what communities or even one’s neighbours actually are like.
The issue with ‘conforming’ is twofold. Firstly, it will never satisfy a number of Reform voters, because what they actually want is an all-white society. They just do not openly say so. Secondly, what is the culture to which people are expected to conform? I, from an immigrant background, am a practising Christian, and a long-standing member of Church of England, no less. That is a very English thing to do. Now, how many Reform voters have darkened the doorsteps of a church in the last year? What happened to the importance of keeping up culture in their case?
Is Americanisation a voluntary process? I don’t think so. I think corporations have imposed it on societies.
Except this never happened.
Winterval: the unpalatable making of a modern myth
It’s rather depressing that this fake news is still getting trotted out nearly three decades after it first appeared. Even the Daily Mail admitted it was false in 2011.
@krissib. Reform got 46% of the vote in Clacton, 43% in Ashfield, 38% in Boston etc. Do you really believe that nearly half the people in Clacton want an all-white society?
I know a few Reform voters personally and none of them want an all-white society. They support Reform for various reasons, including being fed up with the existing parties and the sense of everything in the UK being broken. And yes, feeling that immigration being too high is often a part of it, but thinking that immigration is currently too high is not at all the same thing as being hostile to non-whites (or immigrants) per se. After all, even I as a liberal think that net migration of over 700K a year is unsustainably high.
Sure, there will always be a tiny minority of extremists with awful white-supremacist views (I’d guess, probably < 1% of the electorate), but making out that it's a substantial part of Reform's vote is false and just smearing their voters. And it's not a good way to entice those voters to support us instead!
Addressing concerns around GP access , housing , and other local amenities is of course the correct action . But the progressive left need to understand that the numbers currently are not sustainable. We only need to look at Sweden, a country held up as a model of social democracy, to understand that multiculturalism hasn’t been the success story that many like to think it is . If social democrats continue to believe otherwise, then sadly, the rise of populist parties will continue.
Political strategies that emphasise the need to reject all change (and I do not exempt Lib Dem populist opportunism regarding tax on farmers, WASPI women, and historic nimbyism at byelections, sorry/not-sorry) will prosper if there is a lack of trust and feeings of genuine control about the processes that might create compromise in the political system.
Voters who feel they have meaningful influence in the political process are few, and those who really have it are fewer still.
Frankly, we ain’t got any, or if they are they are so hidden and inaccessible as to be incomprehensible to the average voter, and there are political factions in all parties (incuding the Lib Dems) who focus on scolding those who are nervous about whatever change is being proposed as the enemies of progress.
What is needed is a democratic consensualist party that would be neither reactionary nor anti-conservative, and neither in hoc to commercial vested interests. The Lib Dems go a little way down that road some of the time, but full-blooded commitment to such values is beyond them because of, well, their inherent ideological liberalism and progressivism, which tends to lead them to intellectually dismiss voters who are cautious about change, even when they are shaping campaigns to win their votes.
I do not in any way object to there being controls on immigration.
What I do object to, however, is the manner in which the issue is discussed and how immigrants themselves are talked about. Further, I object to ‘multiculturalism’ being blamed for issues for which it bears no real responsibility. For example, is a person’s religious beliefs responsible for the lack of GP appointments in their local area?
Indeed, what is also a mystery to me is why problems in society are always blamed on immigrant communities. We know, for example that farmers are victims of supermarket behaviour, yet do we see Daily Mail headlines decrying what they are doing? We know that Amazon is problematic in terms of the employee pay and conditions for a start, but is anything actually ever done about this? Short answer is no.
@krissib: With respect, you seem to be mixing up different and unrelated issues. Has any politician ever blamed lack of GP appointments specifically on multiculturalism/different religious beliefs? I can’t recall anyone doing so (probably because it would be obviously absurd). Your post is literally the first time I’ve ever seen anyone try to link those two things, so I suspect you’re imagining something that no-one has actually said.
But it IS totally reasonable to blame lack of GP appointments on population increase (caused by migration) meaning that there are many more people trying to book appointments. And quite separately from that, it is also plausible (not certain, but plausible) that multiculturalism might be in part responsible for some community breakdown, and for people being radicalised, etc.
I also don’t recall anyone ever blaming supermarket behaviour on immigrants, or blaming Amazon’s poor employment practices on immigrants. Those are completely separate problems which may well need fixing, and which have no bearing on immigration. But I don’t see why Government shouldn’t attempt to (separately) solve all three problems: Supermarket oligopolies, Amazon employment practices, and unsustainably high immigration. It’s perfectly normal for Governments to face many different (and unrelated) problems that all need fixing!
There is a good chance we will be facing either Farage or a Tory Farage ‘light’ as the right wing opposition at the next election.
Most of their support and potential support will be reasonable people who are frustrated by how UK’s economic position is affecting them, and how difficult successive governments have found it to deal with this. We have to be careful how we make these voters feel about the Lib Dems.
We should take the challenge of Reform as a trigger to tighten up our values, beliefs and principles. If Reform challenges us it is an indicator that we are not being clear enough about these. An advantage of being clear about these is that we are consistent or at least can explain clearly why we are campaining in a certain way.