Sarah Pochin won Runcorn and Helsby for Reform UK in a political earthquake (Image: Adam Gerrard / Sunday Express)
Forget weight-loss jabs. The best way to shed a stone is to stand in a by-election. This is the advice of Sarah Pochin, who won the Runcorn and Helsby contest this month for Reform UK by a mere six votes. “I lost a stone in weight,” she laughs. “It’s the honest truth.”
Her victory after weeks of pavement-pounding and doorbell-ringing is a frightening blow for both Labour and the Conservatives. Labour will be worried that Reform has taken one of its safest seats in a by-election triggered after sitting MP Mike Amesbury punched a constituent to the ground. Reform has huge ambitions to snatch swathes of traditional Labour territory out of Sir Keir Starmer’s grip.
The presence of Ms Pochin in the Commons and on the nation’s airwaves will also scare the Tories. She is a cockapoo and labrador-owning former magistrate who grew up in a Thatcher-loving household and once served as a Tory councillor – but she has decided Nigel Farage’s party offers the best hope for Britain.
“Reform is the party of the future,” she declares with her trademark enthusiasm. “I left the Conservatives five years ago because even then it was quite clear that what they were best at was destroying themselves.”
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.
Despite the narrowness of the victory, she says she “always really believed that we were gonna win”. Her team opened a campaign office in a shopping centre and she claims on some days around 50 members of the public would drop in.
There was a “very, very powerful feeling,” she says, that people felt “disenfranchised” by the traditional parties and “wanted someone else to vote for”.
She remembers a festival atmosphere seizing Runcorn on the sun-drenched final day of the campaign.
“Politics in this country has been missing that enthusiasm, has been missing that energy and people are so inspired now by this party that it’s an absolute joy to be part of this movement,” she says.
Two big issues came up on the doorstep – immigration and the challenge of making ends meet. People who had voted Labour in the past, she adds, felt particularly “betrayed” on the cost of living.
“Whether that be the removal of the winter fuel allowance, whether it was the slashing of disability benefits, whether it was the cost of energy… Their core voters feel very betrayed by what they’ve done in 10 months.”
The strength of support for Reform is demonstrated in the latest Techne polling which puts the party in first place on 29%, ahead of Labour (22%) and the Conservatives (18%).
Last Monday the Prime Minister ignited controversy in his own party when he launched the Immigration White Paper. He warned that without fair rules in place Britain risks “becoming an island of strangers”.
Nigel Farage celebrating Sarah Pochin’s six-vote victory over Labour (Image: Getty Images)
Keir Starmer is ‘talking waffle’
Ms Pochin doubts that tough talk from Labour will win back voters, saying the PM’s words are “piffle and waffle” unless the country pulls out of the European Court of Human Rights.
“I think we have to credit voters with a bit more understanding,” she says. “They know that unless we come out of the ECHR nothing is going to happen.”
The interview takes place at Reform’s HQ in Millbank Tower – a Thameside skyscraper which has near-mythic status in British political history. It was here that Alastair Campbell and his comrades ran Labour’s campaign in the run-up to the 1997 election landslide.
Today, Reform’s office is buzzing with young staff who want to stage an even more dramatic transformation of UK politics.
“It’s quite clear that we have really rattled Labour,” she says. “Quite rightly so.
“They should be more than rattled. We are coming for both parties.”
She suspects Labour will renege on its commitment to lower the age to 16 in order to stop teenagers voting for Mr Farage’s party.
“The youth, they flock around him,” she says. “Out of nowhere on housing estates, you’d get the 16, 17, 18-year-olds [asking], ‘Nigel can we have a selfie?’
“They love him and I found that fascinating because never before in the 10 years I’ve been very active in politics have I come across the youth so engaged, so enthused by a party leader. That is extraordinary.
“I tell you one thing, I think Labour will back right down on giving 16-year-olds a vote because their vote will go to Nigel Farage.”
Sarah Pochin at Reform’s Millbank Tower HQ (Image: Adam Gerrard / Sunday Express)
‘The Conservatives are finished’
Her journey towards Reform began a decade ago when on a cold and wet evening she went to see Mr Farage speak to a packed audience in Cheshire.
“What fascinated me then – as it still does now – is there was every type of person, every age, different backgrounds,” she remembers. “You could just see from looking across the room he was talking to the British people.”
She grabbed a word with the arch-Brexiteer who “in true Nigel fashion” was “on the back doorstep of this club with a cigarette and a pint.”
Her dad was a warrant officer in the Army and her mum worked in the Post Office. The pair were “huge Margaret Thatcher fans” and their “kitchen table was always piled high with Conservative leaflets”.
But today, their daughter says: “I think they’d be voting Reform and they’d be behind me every step of the way… People like my parents would be in despair at how far we’ve gone down the woke agenda and we need to rein it back in to something sensible.”
Ms Pochin was educated at Haberdashers’ Monmouth School for Girls. She describes her mother and father as a “classic example of parents who worked hard” and “put the money they had into my education”.
“Surely all parents’ desire is to improve the next generation?” she says. “I feel the same way about my children because that is how we improve society.”
She worked for companies including energy giant Shell before serving as a magistrate. Despite coming face to criminals and joining a party known for a hard line on law and order, she does not come across as a member of the hang-em and flog-em brigade.
“I have seen every type of person you can imagine over 20 years that have got themselves in every type of pickle,” she says.
The experience gave her “huge compassion”, and she was particularly moved by children who would turn up in court without any parents.
It also opened her eyes to the challenges facing many people in modern Britain, some of whom make bad choices.
“In order to even get onto the first rung of the ladder as a functioning adult in society you need a job and you somewhere to live,” she says. “Now, so many people don’t have those two things or even one of those two things.”
In the 2017 election she stood for Theresa May’s Conservatives in Bolton South East but grew disenchanted with the Tory machine.
“I got quite close to what was going on in the centre of the Conservative party and it’s toxic,” she says.
Claiming it is “irrelevant” who leads the Conservatives into the next election, she adds: “The Conservatives are finished… They are the minor party now.
“We are the party of opposition. We might only have five MPs but we have the whole voice of the nation behind us.”
She is confident she will be joined on the Reform bench by more MPs as a result of by-election wins during the remainder of this parliament. And she says she is sure Mr Farage can become the country’s next prime minister.
“I wouldn’t be sat here having turned my life upside down and my poor husband’s life upside down if I wasn’t absolutely committed to that mission and we will do it,” she says.
Her husband, Jonathan, works in the construction industry. They have two adult sons and two dogs – a black labrador, Orla, and a cockapoo, Lola.
Sarah Pochin is sure she will not be the only Reform candidate to win a by-election in the coming ye (Image: Adam Gerrard / Sunday Express)
‘I’m just getting started’
Sarah Pochin with Nigel Farage, shortly before being sworn-in as a new MP (Image: Getty Images)
Friends and family were not surprised when she had a second go at getting elected as an MP.
“They’ve always known that I wasn’t finished really with this game,” she says. “And in fact, now I suppose ‘ I’m just getting started .”
She has lived in the political spotlight since she was chosen to stand in the by-election. And attention has only intensified since she netted the half-dozen votes needed to oust Labour.
“I do know my husband thinks he sees more of me on the television at the moment or in the papers than in real life but I’m sure that’ll die down,” she says.
She has made history as the first woman to win a Westminster seat for Reform. But if the party holds its top position in the polls an even greater order of change may be on the way. Sarah Pochin could soon be a household name.
Keir Starmer’s Migration ‘Waffle’ Brutally Exposed by Reform’s Newest MP
Keir Starmer’s approach to migration has come under renewed attack after Reform UK’s newest MP accused the Government of relying on promises and carefully worded announcements while failing to deliver the decisive action many voters believe is necessary.
The intervention has put migration back at the centre of a political argument that shows little sign of disappearing. For Reform, the issue represents one of its strongest opportunities to challenge Labour. For Starmer and his ministers, it is a test of whether the Government can demonstrate that its policies are capable of producing visible results rather than simply changing the language surrounding the problem.
The Reform MP’s criticism focused on what was described as a gap between political rhetoric and practical outcomes. The argument was blunt: announcing new measures is not the same as solving the problem.
Reform turns up the pressure
Migration has become one of the most politically sensitive issues in Britain, with arguments extending far beyond the question of how many people enter the country.
The debate now encompasses asylum applications, illegal Channel crossings, deportations, immigration enforcement, foreign criminals, hotel accommodation, legal challenges and the interpretation of human rights rules.
Reform has attempted to bring all of these issues together under a straightforward political message: Britain needs much tighter control over its borders.
That message has allowed the party to distinguish itself sharply from Labour while also putting pressure on the Conservatives.
The newest Reform MP’s attack therefore carries significance beyond one parliamentary exchange. It reflects a broader strategy in which Reform seeks to portray itself as the party prepared to ask questions that the established parties allegedly avoid.
The language may be confrontational, but the political calculation is clear. If voters believe successive governments have promised stronger immigration control without delivering sufficient change, then Reform can argue that the entire political establishment deserves to be challenged.
Starmer’s changing position
Starmer’s position on migration has evolved considerably since Labour returned to government.
The Prime Minister has repeatedly argued that Britain needs a controlled and managed migration system. His Government has also introduced measures aimed at reducing illegal migration, increasing removals and changing aspects of the asylum system.
But migration policy is rarely judged simply by the number of announcements made in Westminster.
Voters experience the issue through what they see around them: the availability of housing, pressure on public services, the visibility of asylum accommodation, the speed of deportations and whether the Government appears capable of enforcing the rules it has established.
That creates a difficult political environment for Starmer.
Even a Government that can point to increased enforcement activity can still face criticism if the public perception is that illegal migration remains too high or that removals are too slow.
This is where Reform’s accusation of “waffle” becomes politically useful.
The word suggests that the problem is not necessarily a complete absence of policy, but a failure to convince the public that the policy is producing meaningful results.
The battle over deportations
One of the central questions is what happens to people who have no legal right to remain in Britain.
Reform has consistently argued for substantially tougher enforcement, including faster removals and changes to legal mechanisms that can delay deportation.
The party’s supporters say that a migration system cannot command public confidence unless decisions are enforced.
Critics, however, argue that deportation is constrained by practical and legal realities. Individuals may have legitimate protection claims, countries of origin may be unwilling to accept returns, and legal safeguards exist for reasons that go beyond immigration policy.
That tension is unlikely to disappear.
For Labour, the challenge is to demonstrate that enforcement can become more effective without undermining Britain’s legal obligations or its longstanding commitment to protecting genuine refugees.
For Reform, the same complexity provides an opportunity to argue that the Government is hiding behind complexity instead of confronting it.
Small boats remain a political flashpoint
The Channel crossings have become perhaps the clearest symbol of Britain’s migration debate.
Every arrival creates a political argument. Ministers face pressure to demonstrate control, while opposition parties use the figures to question whether government policy is working.
For Reform, small boats represent evidence of what it regards as a fundamental failure of border control.
The party has argued for far more radical measures than those traditionally adopted by the main parties, including major changes to asylum arrangements and human rights law.
Labour has instead sought to combine stronger enforcement with changes to the asylum system and international cooperation.
The difference is not merely technical.
It represents two contrasting political philosophies.
Labour argues that Britain can strengthen border control while maintaining international legal commitments. Reform argues that existing arrangements have become too restrictive on the Government’s ability to act and require much more fundamental change.
That distinction is likely to remain one of the defining political battles of the coming years.
The danger for Labour
The biggest danger for Starmer is not necessarily that every Reform criticism is accepted.
It is that the argument becomes embedded in public discussion: Labour announces another migration initiative, Reform immediately responds that it is insufficient, and voters begin to view every new announcement through that lens.
Once that happens, the Government can find itself permanently defending its record rather than setting the political agenda.
This is particularly difficult because migration involves a combination of long-term structural factors and immediate political pressures.
Reducing illegal crossings is not simply a matter of making a speech or passing one law. It involves international agreements, enforcement capacity, courts, detention facilities, cooperation with other countries and the ability to remove people when claims have failed.
But political patience can be much shorter than the timescale required to reform such a complicated system.
That is the space Reform is attempting to exploit.
Britain’s wider immigration debate
There is also a broader question about what Britain wants its migration system to achieve.
The country has historically accepted migrants for work, study and family reasons while providing protection to people fleeing persecution.
At the same time, governments have struggled to maintain public confidence when legal and illegal migration appear difficult to control.
The argument is therefore not simply between “pro-migration” and “anti-migration” camps.
There are competing views over the scale of migration, the skills Britain needs, the obligations owed to refugees, the speed of asylum decisions and the balance between economic requirements and pressure on public services.
Reform has attempted to simplify this debate into a demand for greater control.
Labour has sought to present itself as a party capable of combining enforcement with legal and humanitarian responsibilities.
The Conservatives are also attempting to define their own position, creating a three-way political contest over who can offer the most credible answer.
Reform’s newest MP sends a wider message
The significance of the Reform MP’s intervention therefore goes beyond the individual criticism of Starmer.
It is part of an attempt to establish a political narrative in which Reform represents urgency while the established parties represent delay.
Whether that narrative succeeds will depend on what happens next.
If the Government manages to reduce illegal crossings, accelerate removals and demonstrate stronger control of the asylum system, Labour will have evidence with which to answer its critics.
If problems persist, however, Reform will have an even stronger argument that the Government’s announcements have not matched reality.
That is why the migration debate is becoming increasingly important for Starmer’s political future.
The real test is delivery
The argument over “waffle” ultimately comes down to delivery.
A government can announce new policies, change legislation, negotiate international agreements and promise tougher enforcement. But voters will ultimately judge the system by whether they can see a difference.
Reform understands this.
Its political strategy is based on turning frustration over migration into a broader argument about trust in government.
Starmer, meanwhile, must show that Labour can produce practical results without abandoning legal safeguards or the principles that underpin Britain’s asylum system.
The next phase of the migration debate will therefore be less about speeches and more about outcomes.
For Reform, every delay is an opportunity to attack Labour.
For Labour, every successful enforcement operation or policy change is an opportunity to demonstrate that the Government is acting.
And for voters, the central question is becoming increasingly simple: can Britain’s immigration system actually be brought under control?
The answer will not be determined by the sharpest parliamentary speech or the strongest political slogan. It will ultimately depend on what happens on Britain’s borders, in the asylum system and in the deportation process.
That is the arena in which Starmer’s migration strategy will face its most important test.