Nigel Farage wants to create a US-style Cabinet “of all talents” (Image: Getty)
Nigel Farage wants to create a US-style Cabinet of “all the talents”, with complete outsiders running crucial government departments, if he storms to victory at the next general election.
As many as half of the Cabinet ministers in a bombshell Reform UK government could be members of the House of Lords rather than elected MPs, as is traditional in British politics.
The controversial approach would allow Reform to appoint figures from a dramatically wider experience pool, but also provokes explosive questions about parliamentary accountability and democratic norms. The news comes as Trump smears UK in Mark Zuckerberg tech-bro meetup: ‘Strange things are happening’.
Details of the radical thinking are revealed in an explosive interview with The Telegraph by Zia Yusuf, who has emerged as one of Reform’s most influential figures.
‘Galactic-level’ talent hunt begins
Mr Yusuf, a party official, said the search for potential Cabinet ministers was already under way, and suggested people with “galactic-level” talent were interested. He refused to give specifics.
He also threw his name in the ring to be Reform’s chancellor if the party wins the next election, arguing that his business background made him well placed to run the economy.
Reform’s annual conference in Birmingham takes place on Friday and Saturday and is built around the theme of “the next step”.
There is more media and business interest in the conference than ever, with the party leading significantly in the opinion polls. About one in three voters say they would vote for Reform now.
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.
Get the latest politics news straight to your phone Join us on WhatsApp
Our community members are treated to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. You can check out at any time. Read our Privacy Policy
Challenge to convince voters
But Mr Farage and his senior colleagues have the challenge of convincing the electorate that they have a plan for government and an effective policy platform for changing the country.
Currently, Reform has no full shadow cabinet – unlike Labour and the Tories in opposition – creating uncertainty about who would lead departments if the party took office.
Mr Yusuf said the plan was to unveil a prospective Cabinet much closer to the election, meaning voters may have to wait until 2029 to learn the proposed team of Reform ministers.
Reform had only five MPs elected into the House of Commons last summer, picking up a sixth in a by-election. Two now no longer sit as Reform MPs.
Household names ‘coming forward’
Explaining the approach to creating a Cabinet-in-waiting, Mr Yusuf said: “The number of people who are coming forward saying that they want to help Reform, either in the background or potentially front line, is growing all of the time.
“Some of these people are household names. I’m not going to give you them, because I’m not going to betray confidences. But these are incredible – this is galactic-level talent that we’d be very proud to have serving our country.
“As Nigel has said, one of our diagnoses for why talent density is so poor is because inevitably you have a situation where our health secretary is also, for example, an MP.
“We don’t think it makes sense necessarily for the minister of defence to also be doing constituency surgeries about the chlorine level in the local swimming pool.
“Now, that’s an important issue, but I don’t think one person is necessarily best suited to do both of those things. So a lot of our Cabinet ministers, a lot of the people Nigel puts in his Cabinet – not all of them, but a lot of them – will not be MPs.”
Asked whether they would therefore be Lords, Mr Yusuf said: “That is the most likely scenario, yes.”
Best candidates ‘don’t want constituency work’
He said there should be no limit on how many Cabinet members were from the Lords, adding: “These are decisions for Nigel. I wouldn’t be prepared to put any upper limit on that.
“I think we’ve got to optimise for the best possible people, and maybe the best possible people don’t want to do all of the stuff that is involved in being an MP.”
Asked again whether as many as half of Reform’s proposed Cabinet could be peers, he said: “Again, it’s Nigel’s decision, but I think so.”
Radical departure from tradition
The approach is a radical departure from how political parties in power have approached constructing their Cabinets for generations.
It is not uncommon for a small number of peers to be in the Cabinet. There is always a leader of the House of Lords and occasionally another Cabinet minister position.
Lord Cameron, the former Conservative leader, was brought back into frontline politics in 2023 by Rishi Sunak and made foreign secretary, meaning one of the four great offices of state was run by a peer.
It is also not uncommon for prime ministers to appoint outside figures to ministerial posts. Sir Keir Starmer made Lord Timpson, the probation expert, the prisons minister, and Lord Vallance, the former government chief scientific adviser, as science minister.
Zia Yusuf has emerged as one of Reform’s most influential figures. (Image: Getty)
Proposal is radical change to British politics
The scale of government departments run by unelected peers that Reform has outlined, however, is unlike anything seen in modern British political history.
The approach will raise questions about parliamentary accountability since, under the usual rules, MPs cannot grill peers in the House of Commons as they do usual Cabinet ministers.
Also, giving more than a dozen people who have not been elected the power to run whole departments of government, such as the country’s NHS services or justice system, would trigger questions about whether democratic norms are being upended.
Echoes of American system
The approach has echoes of the American system, where the US president, once elected and in post, is free to appoint whomever they want to head departments in the executive branch, providing the US Senate approves the choices.
In Donald Trump‘s two terms, he has appointed military generals, TV hosts, former congressmen, one-time political rivals and prominent supporters to cabinet positions.
Sir Keir Starmer is under growing pressure to name peers for Reform when the next Lords appointments are recommended.
The Guardian has reported that plans are being made for a new set of Labour peers to be unveiled imminently. Reform, despite its polling position, has no members in the Lords at present.
Nigel Farage’s SHOCK plan to make unelected Lords his future ‘galactic-level’ government
Nigel Farage’s Reform UK has outlined an unusual plan for how it could form a government, with senior figures suggesting that some of the country’s most important ministerial jobs could go to people who are not elected MPs.
The proposal, described by Reform’s leadership as a way of creating a “government of all the talents”, would potentially involve prominent figures from business, science and other professional backgrounds being appointed to the House of Lords before taking ministerial positions.
Zia Yusuf, who was then a senior Reform figure responsible for policy, described some of the people the party was speaking to as having “galactic-level” talent. The identities of those individuals were not disclosed.
The proposal immediately raised questions about parliamentary accountability, the role of the House of Lords and the balance between political experience and professional expertise.
It also offered an insight into how Reform UK is attempting to prepare itself for government despite having only a small number of MPs in the House of Commons.
A very different kind of cabinet
Under the British parliamentary system, prime ministers traditionally select ministers from among MPs and, in some cases, members of the House of Lords.
Reform’s proposal would place considerably greater emphasis on people who have not built their careers inside Westminster.
The party has suggested that it wants to recruit highly experienced individuals from outside conventional politics and give them senior responsibilities in government.
If necessary, some could be appointed to the Lords, allowing them to serve as ministers while sitting in Parliament.
Yusuf argued that the party was receiving approaches from people who wanted to contribute to a future Reform administration.
He said some were household names and described the potential recruits as “galactic-level talent” that Reform would be proud to have serving the country.
The idea represents a significant departure from the conventional model in which a political party develops a large pool of MPs who are then expected to fill ministerial positions.
Why Reform wants to look outside Westminster
The reasoning behind the proposal is relatively straightforward.
Reform currently has only a small parliamentary representation compared with the established parties.
That creates an obvious practical problem if the party were ever to form a government.
A prime minister needs a cabinet covering areas including the Treasury, Home Office, Foreign Office, health, education, defence, transport, business and housing.
With a limited number of MPs, Reform would have fewer people with parliamentary experience from whom to select ministers.
The party therefore argues that it should not restrict itself to its existing parliamentary group.
Instead, it wants to search more widely for people it considers capable of running major government departments.
That could include senior business executives, economists, scientists, lawyers, technology specialists and other professionals.
The argument is that expertise gained outside politics can sometimes be valuable when running complex departments.
Critics, however, can ask whether technical expertise alone is sufficient for ministerial office, where political judgement, parliamentary accountability and understanding of the legislative process are also important.
The House of Lords question
The most controversial part of the proposal concerns the House of Lords.
Members of the Lords are not elected by the public.
They are appointed, with most serving as life peers.
Under existing constitutional arrangements, members of the Lords can serve as government ministers.
The Reform proposal would therefore use an established constitutional mechanism to bring outside experts into government.
That does not mean that Reform has proposed abolishing elections for MPs or replacing the House of Commons with the Lords.
Instead, the idea is to use appointments to the second chamber to expand the pool of people available for ministerial positions.
Nevertheless, the symbolism is politically significant.
Reform has built much of its identity around criticism of the political establishment. A government heavily populated by appointed peers could therefore create an obvious tension with that message.
Supporters might argue that appointing experts could produce a government with greater specialist knowledge.
Opponents could argue that ministers exercising significant political power should have a direct electoral mandate.
That debate would become particularly important if several senior departments were led by people who had never stood for election.
Farage’s “ministry of all the talents”
Farage himself backed the broader concept during Reform’s 2025 conference.
He spoke about creating a “ministry of all the talents from all walks of life”, reinforcing the idea that his party wanted to recruit people beyond traditional Westminster circles.
The proposal is part of a broader attempt by Reform to demonstrate that it is preparing for the practical responsibilities of government rather than simply campaigning against the established parties.
The party announced a “Department of Preparing for Government”, designed to develop its plans and prepare the organisation for the possibility of entering office.
That represents an important change in the party’s presentation.
Reform began as a successor to the Brexit Party and spent much of its early existence campaigning on specific issues.
Under Farage, it has increasingly sought to portray itself as a potential governing party.
The proposed cabinet structure is one part of that transformation.
A Trump-inspired approach?
The plan has also been compared with the approach of Donald Trump in the United States.
Trump has frequently appointed people from outside traditional political careers to senior positions.
Reform figures have openly examined aspects of the Trump administration as they consider how their own party might operate in government. One analysis described the proposed model as a British version of the “government of all the talents” concept, with Reform looking beyond conventional politicians.
There are, however, major constitutional differences between Britain and the United States.
The US has a presidential system in which cabinet secretaries do not need to be members of Congress.
Britain operates under a parliamentary system in which ministers are accountable to Parliament and the prime minister must maintain the confidence of the House of Commons.
That makes the Reform proposal more complicated.
A minister who sits in the Lords can answer questions in Parliament, but cannot vote in the Commons.
If a department were headed by a peer while the governing party depended on a relatively small Commons majority, the relationship between the minister, MPs and Parliament would require careful management.
The “galactic-level” phrase
The phrase “galactic-level” attracted particular attention because of its unusual wording.
Yusuf was effectively arguing that Reform was talking to individuals of exceptional professional standing.
But the party deliberately kept their identities secret.
That means the public cannot yet independently assess whether these individuals genuinely have the qualifications or experience required for the positions being discussed.
Keeping the names confidential also allows Reform to avoid political speculation before an election.
The party has indicated that appointments would be revealed closer to the time when they were actually needed.
This would allow Reform to present a complete governing team during an election campaign rather than gradually announcing candidates over a long period.
The experience-versus-accountability debate
The proposal highlights a longstanding debate in British politics.
Should ministers primarily be experienced politicians, or should governments make greater use of independent specialists?
There are arguments on both sides.
A professional economist might have years of experience dealing with financial markets but little experience answering questions in Parliament.
A senior scientist might understand a technical policy area in extraordinary detail but have limited experience negotiating legislation.
An experienced politician might understand Parliament and public administration but have less specialist knowledge.
Traditional governments attempt to combine these qualities through ministers, civil servants, advisers and external experts.
Reform’s proposal would shift more responsibility towards people recruited from outside Westminster.
Whether that would improve government performance would depend on how appointments were made, what responsibilities ministers were given and how effectively they worked with Parliament and the civil service.
A potential challenge for Reform
There is also an irony in Reform’s proposal.
The party has attracted several former Conservative politicians, including former cabinet minister Nadine Dorries.
Dorries defected to Reform in September 2025 and became one of the most prominent former Conservative figures associated with the party.
That means Reform is simultaneously recruiting experienced Westminster politicians and talking about building a government dominated by people from outside politics.
The two approaches are not necessarily incompatible.
Former politicians can provide parliamentary knowledge, while outside experts can provide specialist expertise.
But Farage would need to balance the two groups carefully if Reform ever reached government.
What would happen if Reform won power?
The proposal remains conditional on Reform forming a government.
The party has talked about preparing detailed operational plans, drafting legislation in advance and identifying people who could take office quickly.
That reflects the argument that an incoming government should be ready to act immediately rather than spending its first months deciding who should run each department.
The Irish Times reported that Reform had developed a broader five-stage approach involving cabinet recruitment, attracting prominent defectors, preparing operational plans, drafting legislation and dealing with what Farage calls the “blob” within Whitehall.
This suggests that the Lords proposal is not an isolated idea.
It forms part of a wider effort to construct an organisational framework for a possible Reform administration.
The constitutional implications
If implemented, the proposal would inevitably generate debate about Britain’s constitution.
The central question would be whether senior ministers appointed through the Lords have sufficient democratic accountability.
Supporters could argue that the prime minister and governing party would still derive their authority from winning a general election.
The ministers themselves would remain answerable to Parliament.
Critics could argue that important political decisions should be made by people directly elected by voters.
There is also the broader question of the Lords itself.
The chamber has long been criticised by those who believe a second parliamentary chamber should be elected rather than appointed.
Reform’s use of the Lords for ministerial appointments would therefore intersect with a much larger constitutional debate.
Reform’s attempt to prepare for power
Whatever happens to the proposal, it demonstrates how Farage’s party has changed its political ambitions.
Rather than simply demanding that established parties adopt its policies, Reform is increasingly discussing how it would actually run government.
The “galactic-level” cabinet concept is central to that message.
It says that Reform does not believe political experience should be the only qualification for high office.
Instead, it wants to search across British society for people it considers capable of delivering its programme.
Whether voters would support that model is ultimately a political question.
What can be established from Reform’s own statements is that the party is considering an unconventional route to filling senior government positions: combine elected politicians with highly experienced figures from outside Westminster, with some potentially entering government through appointments to the House of Lords.
For Farage, that would represent a dramatic attempt to break with the traditional model of British government.
For critics, it raises equally dramatic questions about accountability.
And for Reform itself, the challenge would be turning the ambitious language of a “ministry of all the talents” into a workable system capable of surviving the realities of Parliament, Whitehall and government.
The phrase “galactic-level” may have captured the headlines, but the underlying issue is much more serious: how a party with a relatively small parliamentary base could assemble a government if it ever won the authority to govern Britain.