This week, on the eve of the local elections, Nigel Farage and Zia Yusuf launched a Reform policy paper on immigration. In online videos they have both publicly stated that, were Reform to form a government, they would set up ‘migrant detention centres’. These would not be placed in constituencies represented by Reform UK. Instead, they “will prioritise Green constituencies and Green-controlled councils to locate these”. Making such an announcement during an election campaign is inflammatory, highly controversial and raises questions about electoral law.
The 1983 Representation of the People Act lays down the rules for elections in England. It defines seven activities which are unlawful if their aim is “inducing or compelling a person to vote in a particular way or to refrain from voting”. In addition to the obvious activities like threats of violence and destroying property, the list includes “causing or threatening to cause financial loss to a person”, and “any other act designed to intimidate a person”. Many people would see a policy of deliberately locating such centres in Green voting constituencies as a kind of threat.
An announcement without implications
Making this announcement during a Parliamentary election would have been unlawful. Conviction for such corrupt practices can lead to a year’s imprisonment and voiding of the election. But this announcement was made during a local election campaign.
Although Reform has been keen to make immigration an issue in the campaign, local authorities have no control over immigration policy. So, there is no prospect of this producing any change in the immediate future: their proposal could only take effect if a Reform government were to be elected in Westminster. They made this launch less than a week before the local elections, but if they were to be challenged legally, they would no doubt argue that their threats are unrelated to these elections.
A law without effects
Reform is also probably aware that the likelihood of legal action is slim, and the cost of losing a case tiny. There are two ways they might be pursued. The Electoral Commission has powers to fine them, but the maximum of £20,000 is a trivial sum given the state of the party’s finances.
The police can, in theory, bring a criminal prosecution, probably through the Metropolitan Police’s Special Enquiry Team. But as a series of inquiries have argued, this system is quite inadequate to the task of stopping parties breaking the law. In the last 25 years there has been only one criminal prosecution, and that defendant was acquitted. Between 2011 and 2021 only eight cases were referred to the police by the Electoral Commission: none led to a prosecution.
People don’t like this policy
As no doubt intended, this was an eye-catching announcement, designed to keep the issue of immigration firmly in public view in the run up to local elections. By Tuesday the announcement had attracted 3.7m views on X.
But it would appear that this policy does not command public support. YouGov polled voters on the question, “Do you think it is acceptable or unacceptable for a government to base decisions that affect individual constituencies on which party people in that constituency voted for at the general election?”. Forty five percent of people thought this unacceptable compared to only 19% who chose acceptable. Even among Reform voters the figures were 37% unacceptable to 34% acceptable. People over 65 are the most Reform minded age group, but they were also the most hostile to this approach with 56% choosing unacceptable and only 16% acceptable.
But does it matter?
It is highly unlikely that anyone will attempt to pursue the legality of this policy, at least in the immediate future. If they do, Reform could well win, they can easily afford a fine, and in any event it would be months after polls close before anything came to court.
But all parties, and the media, have combined to make these elections not about the local issues, but about national politics. Few who vote Reform this week will be able to tell you what they are planning to do about social care, swimming baths, bin collections or potholes. But they will remember Nigel Farage’s face, and the announcement to go with it.
Once again, Farage has demonstrated an unerring political talent for taking full advantage of weaknesses in the law. As Transparency International has argued, we badly need to overhaul our electoral law.
More from East Anglia Bylines
Friends of Bylines Network
There has never been a greater need for grassroots journalism that investigates the stories that really matter, holds power to account and champions the voices of everyday citizens. We are proudly powered by volunteers but what we do isn’t free.
STAND WITH US for independent, citizen-led journalism that makes democracy stronger, and you will even get some exclusive benefits.
