Ex-Tory MP Jonathan Gullis Defects to Reform UK in Major Boost for Nigel Farage
Nigel Farage has secured another high-profile recruit for Reform UK after former Conservative MP Jonathan Gullis announced that he was leaving the Conservative Party and joining his increasingly influential political movement.
The defection, announced on December 1, 2025, came alongside the departures of former Conservative MPs Lia Nici and Chris Green. All three had lost their parliamentary seats at the 2024 general election, meaning their move did not immediately alter the arithmetic of the House of Commons. But politically, the defections represented another serious blow to Kemi Badenoch’s attempt to rebuild the Conservative Party.
For Farage, however, the significance was much greater.
Gullis was not simply another Conservative activist. He had served as a Conservative deputy chairman and previously held ministerial office, making his decision to abandon the party a powerful symbol of the continuing realignment on Britain’s political right.
His message was blunt: the Conservative Party, in his view, had lost touch with the voters it was supposed to represent.
And that is precisely the argument Farage wants voters to hear.
An 18-year Conservative career comes to an end
Gullis said that leaving the Conservatives after 18 years was not a decision he had taken lightly.
But he argued that the party had increasingly failed to deliver on issues that mattered to its traditional supporters, particularly immigration and energy policy. He specifically criticised the Conservatives for failing to control both legal and illegal migration and attacked the impact of net-zero policies on household energy bills and Stoke-on-Trent’s ceramics industry.
His decision therefore fits neatly into Reform’s wider political narrative.
Farage has spent years arguing that the Conservatives promised conservative government but repeatedly failed to deliver it.
The result, according to Reform’s argument, was predictable.
Traditional Conservative voters became disillusioned.
Some moved to Labour in 2024.
Others supported Reform.
And a growing number of former Conservative politicians have now decided that their old party is no longer the best vehicle for their political beliefs.
Gullis is one of the latest examples of that trend.
The irony of Gullis joining Farage
There is an interesting twist to his defection.
Gullis had previously rejected the possibility of joining Reform.
According to ITV and STV, he had once said there was “not a cat’s chance in hell” that he would join Farage’s party after former Conservative MP Lee Anderson defected.
Yet politics can change very quickly.
By December 2025, Gullis had reached the opposite conclusion.
His decision demonstrates just how dramatically the political landscape has shifted since the 2024 election.
A politician who once considered Reform incompatible with his political future eventually concluded that the Conservative Party was the greater problem.
That is precisely the kind of transformation that should worry Conservative strategists.
A victory for Nigel Farage
For Farage, every prominent Conservative defection strengthens his claim that Reform is replacing the Conservatives as the dominant force on the political right.
The party has attracted a growing collection of former Conservative MPs, ministers and councillors.
ITV reported in January 2026 that around 21 former Conservative MPs had by then defected to Reform, including figures such as Suella Braverman, Nadhim Zahawi, Robert Jenrick and Nadine Dorries.
That is an extraordinary development.
For decades, Conservative politicians were the principal representatives of Britain’s political right.
Now some of the people who once occupied senior positions within the Conservative Party are actively helping Farage build a rival organisation.
The symbolism is difficult for Kemi Badenoch to ignore.
The problem for Kemi Badenoch
The Conservative leader faces a particularly uncomfortable question.
If politicians with Conservative backgrounds repeatedly conclude that Reform offers a better political future, why should traditional Conservative voters not reach the same conclusion?
That is the strategic threat.
Badenoch can argue that Reform is inexperienced, internally divided or economically unreliable.
She can insist that the Conservatives remain the only established party capable of governing Britain effectively.
But every defection weakens that argument.
Gullis’s departure was particularly damaging because he was once part of the Conservative leadership structure.
His message was effectively that the problem was not simply a disagreement over one policy.
It was a loss of faith in the direction of the entire party.
Reform is becoming more than a protest party
For years, Reform’s critics described it as a protest movement.
That description has become increasingly difficult to sustain.
The party has won council seats across Britain, secured parliamentary victories and built a growing network of elected representatives.
Former Conservative politicians have also begun joining in significant numbers.
That matters because political parties need more than votes.
They need people who understand government.
They need candidates.
They need councillors.
They need policy specialists.
They need campaigners.
And eventually, if they want to form a government, they need ministers.
Every experienced politician who joins Reform potentially contributes to that infrastructure.
Gullis therefore brings something more valuable than his name.
He brings experience of Westminster and government.
From Parliament to local government
Gullis lost Stoke-on-Trent North to Labour at the 2024 general election.
After leaving Parliament, his political career took a different direction.
He became Mayor of Kidsgrove and later stood as a Reform candidate in the 2026 Newcastle-under-Lyme local elections. He was subsequently elected as a Reform councillor for Kidsgrove and Ravenscliffe, while Reform gained control of Newcastle-under-Lyme.
That progression is significant.
Reform is increasingly building its presence from the bottom up.
The party is no longer relying exclusively on Farage’s national profile.
It is developing councillors, mayors and local political organisations.
That could prove crucial at the next general election.
A party hoping to win Westminster needs a functioning local machine.
The immigration question
Gullis’s decision also highlights one of the most important dividing lines between Reform and the modern Conservative Party.
Immigration has become central to the political realignment on the right.
Gullis explicitly cited the Conservatives’ failure to control both legal and illegal migration as one of his reasons for leaving.
That is politically significant because immigration was one of the issues on which Conservative governments repeatedly promised major reductions.
Yet net migration remained high for much of the previous Conservative administration.
The result was frustration among voters who believed that the government had failed to deliver what it promised.
Reform has been able to exploit that frustration.
Its argument is simple: if the Conservatives could not deliver tougher immigration controls after years in government, why should voters trust them to do so in the future?
Net zero and Stoke-on-Trent
Gullis also focused on energy policy.
His criticism of the Conservatives’ net-zero agenda is particularly relevant to Stoke-on-Trent, where the ceramics industry has historically been an important part of the local economy.
Reform has repeatedly argued that Britain’s climate policies can impose excessive costs on businesses and households.
The party wants a different balance between environmental objectives, energy security and economic competitiveness.
This issue allows Reform to broaden its appeal.
The party is not simply campaigning against immigration.
It can also appeal to voters who are worried about energy bills, industrial decline and the cost of government climate policies.
That broader message could make Reform more competitive in former Labour and Conservative industrial areas.
The “reverse takeover”
Farage has repeatedly insisted that Reform is not simply becoming “Tory Party 2.0”.
Instead, he has described the transformation of British politics as a potential “reverse takeover” of the Conservative Party.
That phrase is revealing.
Farage does not want Reform to become a junior partner to the Conservatives.
He wants the Conservatives to become politically irrelevant.
The objective is not an alliance in which Reform supports a Conservative government.
It is for Reform to become the principal party of the British right.
Gullis’s defection therefore fits perfectly into that strategy.
But there is a danger for Reform
The growing number of former Conservatives joining Reform also creates a problem for Farage.
The more ex-Tories he welcomes, the harder it becomes to argue that Reform represents a completely new political force.
Critics can say that Farage is simply collecting politicians from the party he claims to have replaced.
Labour has already used this argument, accusing Reform of relying on former Conservatives and portraying the party as a continuation of the political establishment rather than a genuine alternative.
Farage has rejected that criticism.
He argues that Reform is fundamentally different because it intends to challenge the political consensus rather than preserve it.
But eventually, voters will judge the party by its policies and performance rather than its branding.
The experience question
There is another challenge.
Reform needs experienced politicians if it wants to govern.
But experienced politicians bring baggage.
Some voters may welcome former Conservative MPs because they understand how government works.
Others may ask a very simple question:
If these politicians were part of the old system, why should we trust them to build the new one?
Gullis will have to answer that question.
His argument is that he changed parties precisely because the Conservatives had abandoned principles he still believes in.
That is a legitimate political argument.
But Reform will need many more such politicians to explain their decisions convincingly.
The Conservatives’ strategic dilemma
Badenoch now faces a fundamental strategic choice.
She can try to compete with Reform directly on immigration, national identity and economic policy.
Or she can attempt to differentiate the Conservatives by presenting them as a more moderate and experienced governing party.
Neither strategy is easy.
If she moves too far towards Reform, she risks validating Farage’s agenda while still leaving voters with the option of choosing the original.
If she moves away from Reform, she risks losing even more voters who prioritise immigration and national sovereignty.
This is the trap Reform has created.
It can set the terms of the debate without having to govern.
The Conservatives are forced to respond.
Labour is watching too
The consequences extend beyond the Conservative Party.
Labour also has a reason to be concerned.
Reform’s rise is not purely a story about Conservative voters moving rightwards.
The party has also attempted to attract former Labour voters, particularly in working-class communities where concerns about immigration, public services, taxation and national identity overlap.
That makes Reform potentially much more dangerous than a traditional right-wing splinter party.
A party that takes votes from only one side of the political spectrum can be contained.
A party capable of taking support from both Labour and Conservative voters can fundamentally alter the electoral map.
The bigger political realignment
Gullis’s defection should therefore be understood as part of something much larger.
Britain’s traditional political loyalties are weakening.
The Conservatives can no longer assume that right-of-centre voters will automatically return to them.
Labour cannot assume that working-class voters will remain loyal simply because of historical party identity.
Reform is exploiting that uncertainty.
Farage’s strategy is based on convincing voters that the old political system has failed and that a new political movement is necessary.
Every defection provides another piece of evidence for that argument.
A test of Farage’s leadership
But the biggest test now belongs to Farage himself.
It is relatively easy to build an opposition movement around dissatisfaction.
It is much harder to build a government.
Reform will eventually have to demonstrate that it has credible answers on the NHS, the economy, defence, education, housing, taxation and public services.
Former Conservative politicians can help.
But they cannot solve the fundamental problem by themselves.
The party must develop a coherent governing programme that extends beyond its strongest issues.
Gullis’s experience in education and local government could therefore become useful.
He can contribute to Reform’s attempt to demonstrate that it has practical experience rather than merely political anger.
A warning to Westminster
The defection also sends a message to Westminster more broadly.
Political parties cannot assume that politicians will remain loyal simply because they have spent years inside the organisation.
Gullis spent 18 years as a Conservative.
Yet he eventually decided that his political future lay elsewhere.
If that can happen to a former deputy chairman and government minister, it can happen to others.
That should concern both major established parties.
Conclusion: another brick in Farage’s political revolution
Jonathan Gullis’s move to Reform UK may not change the composition of Parliament overnight.
He was no longer a sitting MP when he defected.
But politically, his decision matters enormously.
He is a former Conservative deputy chairman, former minister and former MP who concluded that the party he had supported for 18 years had lost touch with the people it was supposed to represent.
His decision sends a powerful message to Conservative voters:
If former Conservative politicians themselves are moving to Reform, perhaps the political centre of gravity really is shifting.
For Nigel Farage, that is exactly the message he wants to send.
For Kemi Badenoch, it is another warning that the battle for the future of Britain’s political right is no longer a distant possibility.
It is happening now.
And with former Tory figures continuing to cross the floor, Reform UK is steadily acquiring something that protest parties rarely possess: people with experience of the political system they are trying to replace.
Whether that ultimately produces a Reform government remains uncertain.
But one thing is becoming increasingly difficult to deny.
Nigel Farage is no longer standing outside Britain’s political establishment and shouting at it. He is recruiting people from inside it—and using them to build something that could eventually replace it.