REFORM UK have managed to drum up a wealth of support from working class communities under the guise of caring for “ordinary people”. But how much do Reform UK actually care about their voters? The National took a deeper look into the party’s manifesto and voting records relating to the welfare state to find out.
According to a report by The Independent, recent YouGov polls suggest that 38% of working-class voters support Reform – despite evidence that the party's policies could actually stand to make them worse off.
We looked at four key policy areas – the NHS, free school meals, benefits and employment – and found that, in spite of promoting themselves as the party of the people, Reform have consistently campaigned on policies or voted against legislation that would keep what’s left of the welfare state intact.
NHS
Nigel Farage has hit back at claims from Labour that under a Reform government, the NHS would no longer be free of charge. An independent fact checker found that Labour had quoted Farage out of context. The right-wing leader has never outright said that his party would fully scrap or privatise the healthcare system and that their policy is “to always keep the NHS free at the point of use”.
However, Farage has been clear that he doesn't want the NHS to be publicly funded.
The party has also proposed a range of measures including expanding private provision, bringing in tax relief on private healthcare, bringing in weekend operating hours, and fining patients for missed appointments.
Their plan also leans heavily on expanding private provision – offering tax relief on private healthcare and introducing NHS-funded vouchers for private treatment when NHS wait times are too long.
Free school meals
Free school meals are a devolved issue, but let's take a look at what Reform are proposing for England.
In 2020, Farage criticised the Conservative government for voting against providing free school meals for pupils from low income families during school holidays, branding the move “mean” and “wrong”.
If the government can subsidise Eat Out to Help Out, not being seen to give poor kids lunch in the school holidays looks mean and is wrong.
— Nigel Farage MP (@Nigel_Farage) October 22, 2020
However, Reform’s official policy documents contain zero proposals regarding the provision of free school meals. Farage also abstained from voting on the Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill at its third reading.
The bill proposes that primary schools in England must provide free breakfast for pupils and limit the number of branded items required for uniforms to support families and reduce inequality around hunger and clothing.
Reform’s four other MPs (excluding Rupert Lowe, who has been suspended by the party) voted on the bill as follows:
-
Lee Anderson: No
-
James McMurdock: No
-
Richard Tice: No
-
Sarah Pochin: No available information
The provision of free school meals helps improve pupils’ concentration in the classroom, as well as helping to tackle poverty, food insecurity and improving children’s overall wellbeing. The Scottish Government, on the other hand, recently expanded eligibility for free school meals, as well as wiping millions of pounds worth of lunch debts for pupils across the country in a bid to tackle the cost of living crisis.
Benefits
Reform UK wants to overhaul the “bloated” benefits system to make work more attractive and stop more people falling into the “benefits trap”.
Their 2024 manifesto states the party would raise the income tax threshold to £20,000 and focus on getting up to 2 million people, especially 16–34-year-olds, back into work. Jobseekers would have to accept a job after two offers and find employment within four months or risk benefit sanctions.
Disability benefit assessments would be face-to-face with medical proof required, though exemptions would apply for severe cases.
They’d also push to end so-called “health tourism” by restricting access to benefits for new arrivals until they’ve lived and worked in the UK for five years.
Reform’s benefit proposals risk punishing the vulnerable rather than addressing the root causes of unemployment. Raising the income tax threshold may help some, but it doesn’t address those whose wages are too low to meet the bar in the first place, and does little to improve job quality or security.
Forcing people to accept jobs under threat of losing benefits – the “two-strike” policy – risks pushing individuals into unsuitable, low-paid, or exploitative work.
Disability campaigners have also long criticised the dehumanising benefits assessments, especially for those with hidden or fluctuating conditions. Increasing the number of assessments required to receive payments is likely to do nothing but cause distress and further alienate disabled people.
As it stands, and unlike myths peddled by the far-right, asylum seekers in the UK are not actually entitled to any mainstream benefits such as Universal Credit. Instead, they are granted £49.18 per person, per week, to cover essentials like food and clothing. If an asylum seeker is placed in accommodation that provides food, the weekly payment is then slashed to £9.95 per person.
However, Reform MPs were largely against Labour's welfare cuts. Farage, Tice, McMurdock and Pochin all voted no at the "chaotic" second reading of the bill, whilst Anderson did not vote at all.
Employment
Outside overhauls to the benefits system, Reform’s proposed employment policies are mostly based on removing EU regulations. Their manifesto mentions “[slashing] red tape to boost industry”, ie scrapping EU based-employment laws and making it easier for businesses to adopt fire and hire staff members.
UK employment law still draws largely from key EU legislations, like the Working Time Regulations 1998 act, TUPE and the Equality Act 2010. Working Time Regulations maintains EU standards on maximum weekly hours (48 hours), rest breaks and annual leave, while TUPE protects employees during business transfers. The Equality Act enforces anti-discrimination and sexual harassment policies in the workplace.
If Reform were to scrap these policies entirely, there is a risk of gutting workers’ rights. Protections like paid leave, rest breaks and safeguards against unfair dismissal could be weakened. Making it “easier to hire and fire” may sound pro-business, but in reality it could lead to job insecurity, longer hours, and reduced protections for vulnerable workers. Stripping back anti-discrimination laws rooted in EU rules, like the Equality Act 2010, could further erode workplace fairness.
Additionally, for a party which claims to be for the people, their voting records on employment rights suggest otherwise.
At the third reading for the Employment Rights Bill, Reform MPs voted as follows:
-
Nigel Farage: No
-
Lee Anderson: Didn’t vote
-
James McMurdock: Didn’t vote
-
Richard Tice: Didn’t vote
-
Sarah Pochin: No information available
When asked by ITV about youth unemployment, Farage said: “There’s a lot of young people not working who could be. It’s almost as if the culture’s gone wrong.”
The Reform leader attributed the number of youngsters out of work to 17-and-18-year-olds not being pushed to work, while failing to cite rising retirement ages, gaps between education and employment, a lack of local jobs and health, work experience and education inequalities caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.
The party has provided no substantial pathways to decreasing the number of unemployed young people, other than vague promises to “get more young people into farming”, recruiting 30,000 for the armed forces and taxing foreign workers to pay for undefined apprenticeships.
