Farage reveals bombshell plan for MPs in Reform Government as he vows to fix Britain . hyn
Nigel Farage. (Image: Getty)
Nigel Farage will force parliamentarians to work seven days a week and skip their summer break to fix Britain after years of neglect, the Reform leader will declare as he sets out plans for the first 100 days in power.
Should he storm to victory at the next General Election, Mr Farage says he will declare a state of national emergency the moment he walks into No 10.
His announcement comes as Reform UK revealed it has eyed up £100 billion in cuts and savings for the Treasury to fund its ambitious changes.
That cash will come in part from taking an axe to the welfare state and reassuring bond markets that they will get finances under control.
Robert Jenrick, the party’s Treasury spokesman, said he would slash £50bn from welfare, cut another £20-30bn from other departments, with another £28 billion coming from reduced debt interest.
Yet it’s clearing the backlog of legislation that has Mr Farage’s main focus, with Mr Jenrick focusing on the purse strings.
A party spokesman said: “Within days of winning the General Election, we will introduce dozens of bills and force Parliament to sit all through summer for seven days a week to pass them. Britain is in serious trouble. We don’t have time to wait around to fix it.”
Mr Farage will address members of the party at their annual gathering in Birmingham today, blasting his election rivals, the Tories, for their “failed” 14 years in charge.
In an attack on Prime Minister Andy Burnham is is expected to accuse the Makerfield MP of wanting “10 more” years of failure.
Mr Farage will say that “time is running out to save Britain”, warning the country “doesn’t have 10 years to be saved”.
To fix the problem, Mr Farage has pledged to force Parliament to sit “day and night” until all the required laws are passed to get the country back on track.
He will even make MPs sit through the summer break, and for seven days a week if needed.
Mr Farage is expected to say that “if the Lords, judiciary or Civil Service get in our way, they will discover just how determined we are” as he commits to doing “anything and everything to make the first 100 days work”.
Over the course of the party’s annual conference, taking place in Birmingham over the next few days, Reform MPs and future ministers will be laying out what they will do in their first 100 days.
With more announcements set to come, Mr Jenrick has been the first to lay out his agenda, promising to cut public spending.
Tax cuts are also on the agenda for the insurgent party, with Mr Jenrick saying he would like to slash income tax if he were to take control of the treasury.
If forced to pick between getting rid of death duties or income tax, the Shadow Chancellor told the press: “I do think you have to think, if you have some headroom and you want to deploy it, what has the greatest effect, what will help the people who are finding life toughest at the moment?
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.
“And, I don’t know, if you were looking at income tax, there are 40 million income tax payers in this country, versus inheritance tax, where there are 36,000 estates a year.
“I mean, it’s a bold Chancellor to say I would rather privilege 36,000 families than 40 million taxpayers.”
Taking aim at the Tories, the party from which he defected earlier this year, Mr Jenrick said the choice between income tax and inheritance tax could become a dividing issue between the parties.
Kemi Badenoch’s outfit was a “regional party” that was focusing on “the sectional interests of the asset rich, the older, those who have got lucky in life” he said.
Reform, meanwhile, focused on “the interest of everyone and the national interest”, Mr Jenrick added.
Whilst he did not guarantee there would be tax cuts in the first Budget should Reform come into power, he said he “would like to believe” there would be.
Labour took aim at the cuts announcement, with party chair Bridget Phillipson MP saying: “Reform has provided no detail on how or where these enormous cuts would fall.
“It’s incredibly reckless and could mean vital public services like hospitals, schools and law enforcement are put at risk.
“Instead of drawing up half-baked plans on the public finances, Farage should come clean about the scandals he and Reform are facing over their own finances.
“The truth about his secret £5 million ‘gift’ will come out – it’s time he finally took responsibility for his actions and proved he’s not just in it for himself.”
Farage Reveals Bombshell Plan for MPs in Reform Government as He Vows to Fix Britain
Nigel Farage has unveiled one of the most dramatic proposals yet for how a future Reform UK government would operate, promising to impose strict deadlines on ministers and radically change the way Parliament works if his party reaches Downing Street.
Farage’s message is built around one central idea: a Reform government would not be given years to deliver its promises. Ministers would have just 100 days to implement specific commitments, and those who failed would be expected to resign.
The proposal, announced as part of Reform UK’s latest political programme, is designed to present the party as fundamentally different from the established political parties. Farage argues that voters have repeatedly seen governments make promises during election campaigns and then fail to deliver them after taking office. His proposed system would attempt to make ministers personally accountable for delivering specific pledges.
According to Reform UK’s own statement, every minister would be given a specific commitment and would have 100 days from the election to demonstrate progress. If a minister failed to implement the promised change, Farage said they would be expected to resign, with dismissal following if they refused.
The proposal raises major questions about how a future Reform administration would interact with Parliament, the civil service, the courts and the House of Lords.
The 100-Day Pledge
Farage has described his plan as a system of “jeopardy pledges”.
The principle is straightforward: ministers would not simply be judged at the next election. They would face an immediate deadline after entering government.
In his September 7 statement, Farage said ministers would have 100 days to prove themselves. Each minister would make a specific pledge, and failure to deliver would mean resignation or dismissal.
The party believes this would provide voters with greater clarity.
Instead of waiting several years to determine whether a government has fulfilled its promises, the public would have a series of early targets against which ministers could be judged.
The proposal is particularly significant because Reform UK is attempting to build its identity around rapid political change.
Farage has repeatedly argued that Britain has spent too long discussing problems without solving them. His 100-day strategy is intended to demonstrate that a Reform government would begin implementing its programme immediately.
Parliament Would Be Recalled
The proposal does not stop with ministers.
Farage has said that a Reform government would declare a state of emergency on its first day in office and immediately recall MPs to Parliament.
Parliamentary recesses would be cancelled, and Parliament could sit for six days a week, or for extremely long periods, until the legislation required for Reform’s programme had been passed.
This would represent a highly unusual approach to the opening months of a government.
Normally, legislation passes through several stages in the House of Commons and House of Lords. Bills can face amendments, debates, committee scrutiny and votes before becoming law.
Farage’s proposal is intended to accelerate that process.
The argument from Reform is that voters who elect a government on the basis of a clear manifesto should expect Parliament to act on those promises.
The counterargument is that parliamentary scrutiny exists partly to examine legislation carefully, identify unintended consequences and allow MPs and peers to challenge ministers.
The tension between speed and scrutiny would therefore become an important constitutional issue.
The House of Lords
Perhaps the most striking part of Farage’s proposal concerns the House of Lords.
He has said that if the Lords attempted to block the government’s programme, a Reform government could appoint hundreds of new peers to create a majority.
Farage also raised the possibility of holding a referendum on the composition of the House of Lords if the chamber resisted the government’s plans.
This would represent a major intervention in Britain’s constitutional arrangements.
The House of Lords currently plays a revising role in the legislative process. Although elected governments normally have significant authority to implement manifesto commitments, the Lords can examine legislation, propose amendments and delay some measures.
Farage’s proposal would therefore challenge the existing balance between the elected House of Commons and the appointed upper chamber.
Whether such a strategy could be implemented would depend on parliamentary procedure, political circumstances and the response of other parties.
A Clash With the Judiciary?
Farage has also proposed major changes to Britain’s relationship with the courts.
At the Reform conference, he said a future government would remove the ability of judges to rely on what he described as outdated conventions involving the European Convention on Human Rights.
He stated that Reform would seek to ensure that Parliament remained the ultimate law-making authority.
This is part of a broader argument within Reform UK that elected politicians should have greater control over national policy.
The issue is legally and constitutionally complex.
Changing Britain’s relationship with the European Convention on Human Rights would require significant legislative and diplomatic consequences. It would also affect how courts consider rights protections in cases involving government decisions.
Farage’s proposal therefore goes beyond ordinary policy reform. It would potentially alter an important part of Britain’s constitutional framework.
Reform and the Civil Service
Another major part of the plan concerns government officials.
Farage has argued that if civil servants obstruct a government elected with a clear manifesto, they should be removed and replaced.
His conference speech said that civil servants should implement the policies of a democratically elected government and that officials who attempted to obstruct the programme could be replaced by people from outside the traditional civil service, including individuals from business.
This proposal builds on ideas previously associated with Reform UK.
Earlier reporting indicated that senior Reform figures had considered replacing permanent secretaries with people judged more likely to implement the party’s priorities.
The argument is that government departments need officials who can deliver ministers’ policies effectively.
The opposing concern is that a politically neutral civil service is an important part of Britain’s constitutional system.
Civil servants are expected to serve governments of different political parties and provide advice based on evidence and administrative expertise.
A significant change to that system could therefore have consequences for the relationship between ministers and officials.
The Cost of the Programme
Farage’s plan is not simply about constitutional reform.
Reform UK has also attached financial figures to its broader programme.
The party says the commitments covered by its 100-day pledges would cost approximately £28 billion by the fifth year of a Reform government. Other previously announced policies would add another £30 billion, producing a total cost of around £58 billion.
Against this, Reform says it has identified £91 billion in itemised savings and new revenue sources.
These are Reform UK’s own estimates.
The important question for voters and independent analysts would be whether the projected savings and additional revenues could actually be achieved.
The difference between estimated savings and realised savings can be substantial when governments implement large-scale reforms.
That is why the financial details of Reform’s programme would likely receive considerable scrutiny if the party entered government.
Immigration Remains Central
The 100-day programme also includes immigration as a major priority.
Farage has promised that a Reform government would attempt to stop small-boat crossings within its first 100 days.
At the party’s September conference, he repeated the commitment and linked it to an agreement signed with Jordan Bardella of France’s National Rally. Reform says the agreement would support a future arrangement for returning people who cross the Channel in small boats.
Reuters reported that the proposed pact has already attracted criticism in France and would only take effect if both parties achieved political power in their respective countries.
This illustrates one of the difficulties facing Farage’s programme.
Some of his proposed policies depend not only on decisions made by a British government but also on cooperation from foreign governments.
Energy and the NHS
Farage’s conference speech also highlighted other first-100-day commitments.
Reform has promised to reduce energy bills and end what it calls excessive Net Zero policies. The party has also proposed increasing domestic NHS training and reducing reliance on recruiting doctors and nurses from overseas.
Other Reform figures have been assigned their own policy targets.
Robert Jenrick, for example, has been given responsibility for a pledge involving welfare spending and tax reductions, while Suella Braverman has been associated with proposals concerning university education and tuition fees.
The intention is to make individual ministers responsible for specific elements of the programme.
What Would a Reform Government Look Like?
Farage’s proposals suggest a government designed around speed, accountability and central political control.
Ministers would face explicit deadlines.
Parliament would be expected to work intensively.
The House of Lords could face major reform.
The relationship between ministers and judges could change.
The civil service could be reorganised.
At the same time, Reform would pursue significant changes to immigration, energy, taxation, welfare and public services.
Taken together, these proposals would represent a substantial departure from the way British governments have traditionally operated.
The Big Test
The central question would be whether speed produces effective government.
Fast legislation can allow a government to implement its programme quickly, but complicated policies can also require consultation, expert analysis and parliamentary scrutiny.
A 100-day deadline could therefore create strong incentives for ministers to deliver.
It could also create pressure to prioritise speed over detailed consideration.
The same applies to the proposed changes to Parliament, the Lords, the judiciary and the civil service.
Reform argues that these institutions should not prevent an elected government from carrying out its promises. Critics may argue that those institutions exist partly to prevent governments from exercising power without sufficient checks.
The debate is therefore not simply about Nigel Farage.
It is about what voters want Britain’s system of government to look like.
A Potential Turning Point
Farage’s latest proposals provide the clearest indication yet of how Reform UK intends to govern if it wins a parliamentary majority.
The party is promising rapid action, strict ministerial accountability and major institutional reform.
The 100-day pledge is particularly significant because it creates a measurable timetable.
If Reform eventually forms a government, voters would be able to examine each pledge and determine whether it had actually been implemented.
For now, however, these remain proposals from a political party seeking government rather than laws already in force.
The scale of Farage’s programme is nevertheless substantial.
He is not simply promising different policies. He is proposing changes to the machinery through which those policies would be delivered.
Parliament, the House of Lords, the courts and the civil service could all face significant changes under his proposed model.
That makes the next general election about more than individual policy questions. It could also become a debate about how Britain itself should be governed.
Farage has presented his plan as an attempt to restore accountability and accelerate reform. Whether voters ultimately support that approach is for them to decide.
What is clear is that Reform UK has now put forward a detailed vision in which ministers face immediate consequences for failing to deliver their promises, Parliament could be recalled for an intensive legislative programme, and longstanding constitutional arrangements could be reconsidered.
If that programme ever reaches Downing Street, Britain’s political institutions could enter a period of unusually rapid change.
