How recent revelations make Reform’s financial dealings more obvious but mask deeper risks

The revelations by Channel 4 and Verbatim Investigations about (further) dubious donations to the Reform Party have made the headlines and are causing serious difficulty for the party.

But they have also obscured some of the most dangerous aspects of the far-right movement:

• The revelations show in a dramatic way the extent to which Reform is prepared to bend and break the regulations that are meant to bind political parties and protect UK democracy;
• But in fact there is a long trail of similar donations, some much larger and some already under investigation;
• And the extensive coverage of the new revelations overshadows some of the more sinister aspects of the party, its backers and their intentions.

It is tempting to see this as a slightly farcical situation, and the threat from the far-right as dead. But none of the forces which drove Reform to a point where it was for months leading in the polls have given up on the goal of imposing a far-right party on the UK; they may just be switching horses.

The recent revelations show Reform’s attitude to political donations

The investigation, and recordings of conversations between Reform Party officials (including Nigel Farage) and supposed donors from the US made entertaining viewing, and good headlines – and have already sparked the departure of the two key officials most heavily involved:  James Orr, the Reform Party’s Head of Policy, and Dan Jukes, a senior aide to Farage.

Bob Posner, a lawyer and former Chief Executive of the UK Electoral Commission, has seen the key findings of the Verbatim investigation, and said there should now be a criminal investigation as “serious criminal offences” may have been committed.

In the recordings, James Orr suggested there would be little risk of adverse consequences because the proposal was for “technical breaches” of rules and described the Electoral Commission as “completely useless … dumb and ineffective.”

An Electoral Commission spokesperson said: “Information about any potential attempt to evade the controls on donations is for the police to consider.”

So the exposure has been damaging to Reform.

But we knew that already

Reform has previously faced scrutiny over its finances after failing to declare a £5m gift from the Thailand-based donor and crypto billionaire, Christopher Harborne. And the parliamentary Inquiry into this gift has re-opened since Farage’s re-election as MP, to his intense displeasure.

Over the past seven years, Harborne has given more than £22m to Reform. That makes the party almost totally dependent on his support. Farage held a meeting with the Bank of England to discuss the Bank’s plans for cryptocurrency regulation, which the Governor later admitted it would not have held had the donations been clear, as the topic was related to business interests of the donor. Since Starmer talked about tightening rules on donors, Harborne has explicitly stated he intends to find ways around rules on foreign donations to UK politicians.

There have also been serious questions raised about further financial support from a friend, the convicted fraudster George Cottrell, before the last election. The BBC reported on 25 July that the police were investigating two donations of £250,000 each to Reform UK from Britain Means Business. Britain Means Business was set up in August 2017 under the name Leave Means Leave, and campaigned for what it called a “clean Brexit.” It appears to have been the channel by which Cottrell and his family made their donations.

And Reform was the first UK party actively to solicit donations via crypto-currencies (which are notoriously harder to trace).

So the Channel 4/Verbatim revelations are eye-catching, but do not tell us much more than we knew before: Reform is open to donations from any source.

They overshadow some of the more sinister aspects of the party

These disclosures are welcome, but they have overshadowed even more important issues which Reform also highlights. Issues such as Russia’s repeated attempts to corrupt UK politics, the links between the UK far-right and US Big Tech – and since 2024 the US government itself – and the danger that a far-right party would follow a similar path to the US Project 2025, unwinding democracy at high speed.

The links to Russia

Unsurprisingly there are funding links with major donors whose assets are largely Russian and those linked with pro-Putin propaganda networks and even armaments suppliers.

There have also been allegations, described as “gravely concerning” about Russian interference in UK elections in support of Reform.

Nathan Gill, a key aide to Farage was convicted of taking bribes to make pro-Russian statements. And, of course, Nigel Farage has himself been outspoken about his long-standing admiration for Putin.

The links with US & Big Tech

Elon Musk, the world’s richest man, once actively supported Farage, and offered to donate $100m to the party – a huge amount by the standards of UK politics, but only around 0.01% of his peak wealth. And so did Donald Trump, who indeed may still do so, even if that support is not hugely effective. A US-funded think tank, now named Centre for a Better Britain, has been set up to develop a UK version of Trump’s Project 2025. And when we look at what has happened to America, that is a very unappealing thought.

The state of emergency

The Guardian reported Farage’s intention to declare a state of emergency. In phrasing reminiscent of Trump’s promise to be a dictator on Day One, Reform said:

“During his speech to the Reform UK 2026 national conference, Nigel Farage is expected to commit to declaring a national emergency on Day One of a Reform UK government … [a spokesman said] ‘if the Lords, judiciary or civil service get in our way they will discover just how determined we are’ and that Reform will commit to doing ‘anything and everything to make the first 100 days work.’”

Given that in our parliamentary system, a government with a working majority has essentially total power to pass legislation already, we have to ask,

“What additional power does he want, and why?”

Conclusion

What Reform wants to do, can be safely compared with what Trump has done. And that is a scary thought. But there is a risk that, because Reform’s faults are now so much in the open, and its polling is in decline, we relax, thinking that the danger of a far-right government in the UK has receded and we are back to business as usual.

That might be dangerously complacent.

Even if many of the backers who previously supported him – including Musk and most of the UK media – have now turned against Farage, it is clear that they have not turned against the idea of installing a far-right government in the UK (and elsewhere). Just look at Musk’s worldwide activities and Trump’s National Security Strategy. After suggesting that the EU and liberal European governments are risking civilisational erasure, the document says:

“America encourages its political allies in Europe to promote this revival of spirit, and the growing influence of patriotic European parties indeed gives cause for great optimism. Our goal should be to help Europe correct its current trajectory.”

By ‘revival of spirit,’ of course, they mean resurgence of far-right parties.

In 2024, when it became clear that the Conservatives were likely to lose the general election to Labour, I explored the options for the far-right, looking at how they might lose the battle (as of course they did) but still hope to win the war. The article suggested that they would aim to play the long game, making full use of all the resources at their disposal:

• Unite the far right, divide the rest;
• Neuter Labour;
• Sweep back into power in 2028/9 and complete the job the last 14 years have started.

The neutering Labour part of the strategy has worked well so far. But they have not yet united the Right. At that time, it seemed that the options were:

1. Destroy the Conservative Party and throw your weight behind Reform;
2. Destroy the Reform Party and throw your weight behind the Conservatives;
3. Engineer some kind of merger.

For a while, it looked as though Option 1 was the preferred strategy, despite its obvious electoral downsides; that currently looks less likely. But now there are other far-right parties which must also be considered.

Last weekend, a highly-organised group of up to 500 masked men in uniform conducted an exercise in which they successfully paralysed one of Britain’s largest ports for several hours. A group called Patriot Platform has claimed responsibility. Who is behind them? What do they want? What, specifically, are they rehearsing for?

So the risk of going the way of the US remains unacceptably high, and the need for defensive constitutional reform is as great as ever. And our media are not highlighting the risks.

One of our key projects, Defensive Constitutional Reform, talked of inaction as being equivalent to playing Russian roulette with British democracy, and set out what the UK government can do while there is still time, to prevent the UK suffering the fate of the US. At the moment, we are still playing.

If you think this is important, please share using the buttons below; and if you are not yet a 99% member, please join us.