Mieka Smiles on Nigel Farage’s outrageous promise (Image: Daily Express/PA)
It’s that time of year again. The weird kind of reverse Christmas for UK residents, when your council tax rockets, but you see absolutely zero bang for your buck. As a local councillor – and former deputy mayor – I’ve sat in enough budget meetings to know this much: setting council tax is not for the faint of heart. Every line feels like you’re teetering between going bust or scrapping yet another bin collection. Which is why I nearly choked on my cornflakes when Nigel Farage’s lot swept to power in councils across the country last May, and vowed to tackle waste to bring down council tax. This will be interesting, I thought.
And even though everyone hates a know-it-all, I knew exactly how it would end. Because while councils are far from paragons of efficiency, sadly, there aren’t secret piles of cash lying about in the town hall loft. Council budgets are dominated by things that even the most hopeful new council member can’t just wish away. Children’s services, adult social care and the special educational needs transport bill are the unholy trinity of council tax drain.
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.
Last summer Zia Yusef, head of policy for Reform UK, said that “waste and in some cases corruption” within councils was “off the charts” as he launched his own version of a US DOGE-style efficiency drive.
And it all sounded great until Reform councillors running Kent County Council waved the white flag on their hunt for pennies hiding behind the sofa cushions. Cllr Paul Chamberlain, cabinet member responsible for the council’s Department of Local Government Efficiency, (yes, DOLGE…) admitted that they’d somewhat overplayed their hand.
He said: “We made some assumptions that we would come in here and find some craziness that Doge found in America and that was wrong, we didn’t find any of that.”
But it gets worse.
At least four of 10 Reform UK councils have now proposed 5% council tax rises, the maximum permitted by law. Reform UK’s Cllr George Finch, the 19-year-old leader at Warwickshire county council, has been forced to defend proposals for a 3.89% council tax rise.
He said: “We want low tax, low spend and we were always committed to that. It’s just that national pressures that the government is not solving [such as] SEND [special educational needs and disabilities] home-school transport.”
Well! I have to say, that young George has been taking notice. Indeed, I could tell you stories about the costs in those areas that would truly make your hair stand on end, which central Government needs to get a grip on pronto.
The moral of the story is simple. Reform UK can make all the crazy promises they like – but that certainly doesn’t mean they can back them up. And as we approach these make-or-break local elections in May, voters would do well to ask not just what candidates are promising, but whether they understand how on Earth they will deliver on the
Nigel Farage Has Made an Outrageous Promise – and It’s About to Blow Up
Nigel Farage has made one of the most ambitious promises of Reform UK’s political campaign: if the party enters government, it will attempt to deliver a sweeping programme of change within its first 100 days.
The Reform leader has repeatedly presented the pledge as a test of whether his party can turn its political message into concrete government action. In a speech at the party’s September conference, Farage declared that Reform would use its first 100 days to tackle immigration, energy costs, the NHS and other areas it says have been neglected by successive governments. Reform itself has described the programme as a “national emergency” response to what it calls “Broken Britain.”
But the scale of the promises has also created an obvious question: how much can realistically be achieved in just three months?
That question is becoming increasingly important as Reform moves from campaigning around individual issues towards presenting itself as a potential governing party.
The 100-day pledge
Farage’s promise is built around speed.
Rather than presenting change as a gradual process, he has argued that a Reform government would immediately begin implementing its central policies after taking office.
The party’s official programme includes a pledge to stop small-boat crossings within the first 100 days, reduce energy bills by £250 and change the government’s approach to net zero. It also proposes increasing NHS training so that Britain becomes less dependent on recruiting medical staff from overseas.
The 100-day target gives the programme a clear political deadline.
It also creates a straightforward way for supporters and critics to judge the party’s performance if Reform eventually enters government.
Farage has even said that ministers who lack the courage or ability to deliver his programme during the first 100 days could be dismissed. In a September 6 statement, he described the first 100 days as a period in which ministers would have to demonstrate that they could implement Reform’s agenda.
That promise could therefore become one of the most closely watched elements of a future Reform administration.
Immigration at the centre
The most prominent part of the programme concerns immigration.
Reform has repeatedly said that illegal Channel crossings would be stopped within 100 days.
The party has proposed what it calls “Operation Fortress”, involving the use of naval resources to intercept boats travelling across the Channel and return people to France or another safe destination under the party’s proposed system.
Farage has described the policy as “rescue and return”, while critics have questioned its practicality and compatibility with international obligations. Al Jazeera reported that experts had raised concerns about the operational and legal difficulties involved in returning asylum seekers intercepted at sea.
The issue has also become international.
In September, Farage signed an agreement with Jordan Bardella, president of France’s National Rally, concerning cooperation over Channel crossings. Reform said the agreement was intended to create closer cooperation between Britain and France and help prevent boats from making the journey.
The proposal illustrates both the ambition and complexity of the 100-day promise.
Stopping small boats is not simply a matter of changing British policy. It involves cooperation with another country, maritime operations, asylum law, border enforcement and the circumstances of people attempting to cross the Channel.
The energy promise
Another major pledge concerns energy bills.
Farage has promised that Reform would cut household energy costs by £250 while ending what the party describes as excessive elements of the net-zero programme.
Reform argues that Britain’s energy policies have contributed to high costs and damaged industrial competitiveness.
The party therefore wants to change the balance between environmental policy, energy security and household affordability.
However, reducing energy bills involves more than government announcements.
Prices depend on wholesale energy costs, network charges, taxation, regulation and other factors. Government policy can influence some of these elements, but the final price paid by households is also affected by conditions beyond Westminster’s direct control.
That makes the £250 figure a particularly clear test of the party’s promise.
If Reform were eventually in government, voters would be able to compare actual household bills with the reduction promised during the campaign.
The NHS challenge
Healthcare is another area where Farage has promised rapid action.
At the Reform conference, he argued that Britain does not train enough of its own doctors and nurses and has therefore become dependent on international recruitment.
His proposed response includes expanding NHS training.
The issue illustrates a tension within Reform’s wider programme.
The party wants tighter immigration controls while also addressing staffing shortages in public services that currently rely on overseas workers.
Increasing domestic training could eventually reduce reliance on overseas recruitment, but training doctors and nurses takes years rather than months.
A 100-day programme could therefore begin a process, but it could not immediately produce a new generation of fully qualified medical professionals.
That distinction will be important when the party’s promises are examined in practical terms.
A promise designed to change the political conversation
Farage’s 100-day pledge is also significant because of the way it changes the political conversation.
For years, Reform and its predecessors have focused heavily on criticism of established parties.
The new strategy places greater emphasis on what Reform would actually do with government power.
That is a natural development for a party seeking to be regarded as a potential governing force.
Farage has also said that he wants Reform to be prepared for a general election that he believes could take place as early as spring 2027.
At the September conference, he repeated his view that financial pressures would force the Labour government into an early election. That remains Farage’s political assessment rather than an announced election timetable.
The 100-day programme is therefore also an attempt to prepare Reform for government.
The House of Lords problem
One of the most striking parts of Farage’s wider plan concerns Parliament’s second chamber.
He warned that if the House of Lords attempted to block a Reform government’s programme, his party could respond by appointing hundreds of new peers in order to create a majority.
The idea is not entirely new. Governments have historically used the possibility of creating peers as a way of dealing with conflicts between the elected House of Commons and the unelected Lords.
But hundreds of appointments would represent a dramatic change to the composition of the chamber.
It demonstrates the extent to which Farage’s programme goes beyond individual policies and into the structure of Britain’s political system.
The proposal also highlights an important question surrounding the 100-day promise: not every policy can be implemented simply because a prime minister announces it.
Legislation may require parliamentary approval. Some policies would require negotiations with other governments. Others could face legal challenges or administrative limitations.
The gap between announcing and delivering
This is where Farage’s promise could face its biggest practical test.
A government can announce priorities immediately.
Delivering them is more complicated.
Stopping small boats would require operational cooperation with France and potentially other countries. Cutting energy bills would require changes across a complicated market. Expanding NHS training would require funding, facilities and years of education.
Changing net-zero policy could also affect investment decisions, energy infrastructure and Britain’s international commitments.
None of this means that Reform’s proposals could not be attempted.
It means that the 100-day deadline creates a very high standard for measuring success.
A government could pass legislation within 100 days, but the economic and social effects of that legislation might take considerably longer to appear.
Farage’s personal commitment
Farage has increasingly tied his own political reputation to the Reform programme.
In June, he told LBC that he wanted to become prime minister and argued that he was prepared to challenge the political establishment. He said his motivation was not simply holding the office but using it to make major changes.
That makes the first 100 days more than a party policy document.
It is also a personal political promise.
If Reform eventually forms a government, Farage would face the challenge of translating the highly direct language of opposition politics into the more complicated responsibilities of government.
Cabinet ministers would have to manage departments, civil servants would have to implement policies, Parliament would have to consider legislation and officials would have to work through the legal and financial consequences.
The difference between campaigning and governing would become unavoidable.
The political gamble
The 100-day pledge therefore contains an unusual political gamble.
Its strength is its clarity.
Voters can understand what Reform says it intends to do and when it intends to do it.
But the same clarity creates a measurable benchmark.
If the party promises to stop small boats within 100 days, the number of crossings would become an obvious measure. If it promises a £250 energy reduction, household bills would provide another benchmark. If it promises rapid NHS expansion, recruitment and training figures would become relevant.
The programme would therefore be judged against outcomes rather than speeches.
That could make the pledge politically powerful, but it also means that unfulfilled commitments would be difficult to explain away.
A new phase for Reform
Reform UK’s evolution has made the question of delivery increasingly important.
The party has moved from the Brexit Party tradition into a broader political organisation with MPs, local representatives and ambitions for government.
Its official programme now covers immigration, energy, healthcare, taxation and the relationship between government institutions.
Farage’s first-100-days promise is an attempt to bring those ideas together into one governing timetable.
Whether the timetable can accommodate all of the proposed changes is a separate question.
Some measures could potentially begin immediately through executive decisions. Others would require legislation, negotiations or long-term investment.
That difference will matter enormously if Reform ever takes office.
The promise now hanging over Farage
For now, the 100-day programme remains a set of political commitments rather than a government record.
Farage has made clear that he wants voters to believe Reform is ready not simply to protest but to govern.
His September conference speech gave that argument a deadline: the first 100 days.
The promise is ambitious because it seeks rapid change across several of the most difficult areas of public policy.
It is also unusually easy to measure.
If Reform eventually forms a government, the public will be able to ask a simple question after 100 days: which promises have actually been delivered, which have merely been started, and which remain unfulfilled?
That is where Farage’s headline-making pledge could face its most significant test.
The rhetoric of a campaign can promise speed.
Government has to deliver results within the constraints of Parliament, budgets, institutions, courts and international agreements.
For Reform UK, the distance between those two worlds is now becoming increasingly important.
Farage has promised a revolution in the first 100 days.
If the opportunity to govern arrives, those 100 days will provide the first real test of whether the party’s promises can be translated into government action.