Nigel Farage to ‘relinquish’ control of Reform UK by giving up majority shares
Mr Farage said he intended to change the structure of the party – which is also a registered company – to give control to the members.
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Nigel Farage has said he is “relinquishing” control of Reform UK as he gives up his majority shareholder position.
Reform UK Ltd is a registered company, unlike most other political parties, and was previously registered as the Brexit Party from 2018-2021.
Companies House lists party leader Mr Farage, and deputy leader Richard Tice, as persons with significant control, with Mr Farage currently owning more than 50% of shares.
In a video posted to X, Mr Farage said: “I’ve now made a decision. I no longer need to control this party. I’m going to let go.
“We will change the structure of the party from one limited by shares to a company limited by guarantee, and that means it’s the members of Reform that will own this party.
“I am relinquishing control of the company, and indeed of the overall control of the party, it’s now going to be the members, and that, I think, is the right thing, and it’s the right thing because this conference marks the coming of age of Reform UK, and that’s something that I’m very, very excited about.”
After July’s general election, where they received 14% of the vote share, Reform now has five MPs in Parliament.
Reform faced frequent criticism over its election campaign for racist or xenophobic comments made on social media by candidates, after which Mr Farage vowed he would “professionalise” the party in a bid to become the official opposition in 2029.
He said that when he established Reform UK Limited his financial ownership “led to much hilarity in the press”, but was necessary so he could “make very fast decisions”.
The MP for Clacton added: “Secondly, and most importantly, the real reason was to prevent a small, nascent political party being taken over by malign actors, and that was my really big fear, but we’ve moved on.”
Former party deputy leader Ben Habib posted a video to X where he said that he had been advocating for the democratisation of the party behind the scenes “for many years”.
He claimed he was not “having a go” at Mr Farage, but that “if a leader is going to act with integrity it’s best he be held to account by the membership of his own party”.
He said: “There’s nothing like accountability and scrutiny and the knowledge that you will be removed as leader to drive you to behave with integrity, with purpose and fulfilling the promises that you’ve made to the people of the membership.”
Mr Habib also asserted that Reform was planning a new constitution but that this would not allow the party members to remove Mr Farage as leader, only to call a vote of no confidence – the company’s board would have the final decision.
He said: “This is not democracy. This is not the ability of the membership to remove the leader. This is the technical ability of the membership to ask the board to please consider removing the leader.”
He added: “The constitution itself is an awful document and could be picked apart in multiple different ways, but it certainly hasn’t had the finest legal minds in the country working on it day and night.
“I could have drafted it, I would have done a better job drafting it, and it doesn’t – and this is obviously the critical point – it doesn’t deliver the ability to remove the leader.”