Robert Jenrick suggested Reform could peter out or block Tories’ return to power (Image: Guy Bell/Shutterstock)

However, he said he did not want to “bet the house on that because the opposite could also be true”.

The former immigration minister said: “They could build on this and they could fight us to be the standard-bearer of the centre-right in British politics. So, I think we’ve got to take it very seriously, and we’ve got to try to bring those people back to us.”

Robert Jenrick at the announcement of Kemi Badenoch’s leadership victory (Image: Getty Images)

In the event with Newbury Conservatives, Mr Jenrick insisted their party was in his “blood” and that he was “first and foremost a member”, stating: “I genuinely believe that our party remains our country’s best hope.” He said it was a “wasted conversation” to try to persuade Mr Farage to join the Conservatives and cautioned against trying to “out-Reform Reform”.

He said he did not seek to merge the Conservatives with Reform but wanted to “take all the Reform voters and bring them back home to the Conservative Party”.

“I think Reform has flourished because we have failed,” he said.

Nigel Farage would now make Robert Jenrick his Chancellor (Image: Guy Bell/Shutterstock)

A Conservative source said: “Jenrick is a chancer who has only ever been out for himself. He doesn’t care about the country – just the next rung on the career ladder. It’s only a matter of time before he stabs Farage in the back – like he has everyone else.”

Attacking Mr Farage’s plans to make him Chancellor, the source said he lacked business experience, adding: “What does he know about the economy? He’s hardly set the world alight.”

Mr Jenrick told the Sunday Express: “The Tory party refused to apologise for their mistakes or change, so I left. Instead, they sneered at the millions of voters who left them for Reform UK and pretended it was everyone else’s fault. They’ve now been consigned to electoral irrelevance, so if Express readers want to stop Keir Starmer and Zack Polanski only Reform UK and Nigel Farage can do it.”

Robert Jenrick suspected Nigel Farage could ‘p*** everybody off’ in Reform UK

Robert Jenrick’s arrival in Reform UK was supposed to strengthen Nigel Farage’s political operation by adding a former Conservative cabinet minister with government experience to the party’s senior ranks. Yet the relationship between the two men has also highlighted the tensions that can emerge when a rapidly expanding political organisation brings together established figures from very different political backgrounds.

The headline claim that Jenrick suspected Farage could “p*** everybody off” captures one element of the uncertainty surrounding Reform’s internal culture: how a party built around Farage’s highly recognisable political identity can expand into a broader organisation without creating competing centres of authority.

Jenrick’s relationship with Farage is particularly notable because the two politicians had spent years on opposite sides of the Conservative-Reform divide. Before joining Reform, Jenrick was a prominent Conservative politician and had served in government. Farage, meanwhile, spent years criticising the Conservatives for policies including taxation, immigration and Brexit implementation.

Their eventual political partnership therefore represented a significant change.

From Conservative critic to Reform colleague

Jenrick’s move to Reform transformed him from one of the Conservative Party’s better-known figures into one of Farage’s senior colleagues.

In February 2026, Farage unveiled a Reform frontbench that included Jenrick, Suella Braverman, Richard Tice and Zia Yusuf. Jenrick was given responsibility for the Treasury brief, while Braverman took education, skills and equalities, Tice handled business, trade and energy, and Yusuf took home affairs and migration.

Farage described the new team as evidence that Reform was becoming more than a “one-man band”.

The significance of that change was considerable. For years, Farage had been the dominant public face of the party and its predecessors. Bringing in figures such as Jenrick and Braverman allowed Reform to present a wider range of senior politicians with experience inside government.

At the same time, a larger leadership structure inevitably raises questions about authority, responsibility and political direction.

A complicated history

The relationship between Farage and Jenrick did not begin with mutual political trust.

In April 2025, when Jenrick was still a Conservative politician, Farage publicly questioned whether he was genuinely committed to the positions he had begun advocating on the political right.

Sky News reported that Farage called him “Robert Generic” and referred to his previous political positions while questioning whether his newer views represented a genuine change of political conviction. Farage also rejected the prospect of a formal alliance between Reform and the Conservatives at that stage.

The history makes Jenrick’s eventual defection particularly interesting.

For Farage, the arrival of a senior former Conservative could demonstrate that Reform was attracting politicians who had previously occupied influential positions within the established political system.

For Jenrick, joining Reform represented a major change in political direction after his years as a Conservative MP and minister.

That history has continued to shape how both men are viewed inside the party.

The question of who controls Reform

As Reform has expanded, one of the central questions has been whether Farage can remain the unquestioned political centre while giving other figures enough authority to develop their own profiles.

The February frontbench appointments were partly designed to address that issue.

Farage explicitly said that Reform was building what he called a “machine for government”, with senior figures capable of leading different departments. He argued that the party now had its own identity beyond his personal profile.

That is an important development for any political organisation seeking to govern.

A party preparing for government needs politicians who can speak on different policy areas, defend decisions and develop detailed programmes. It cannot rely indefinitely on a single figure to dominate every political argument.

But distributing authority can also create disagreements.

The Guardian reported in July 2026 that tensions had emerged between different factions within Reform, including disagreements involving Jenrick and Zia Yusuf. The newspaper also reported that some long-standing Reform figures were suspicious of former Conservatives who had joined the party.

Those reports do not establish that Farage had lost control of the party. They do, however, illustrate the organisational challenges that accompany Reform’s expansion.

Old Reformers and new arrivals

One of the underlying tensions inside Reform is the difference between politicians who built their careers within the party’s anti-establishment movement and politicians who previously belonged to the Conservative establishment.

Jenrick and Braverman are obvious examples of the second group.

Their experience in government gives Reform a different kind of political credibility, particularly when the party discusses taxation, justice, education, immigration and the machinery of government.

But former Conservatives also bring political histories that can be scrutinised by Reform’s original supporters.

This is particularly relevant because Farage spent years telling Conservative voters that the established Conservative Party had failed them.

Welcoming former Conservative ministers therefore creates an unusual political balancing act.

Reform must demonstrate that these politicians have genuinely adopted the party’s programme while also convincing its existing supporters that the organisation has not simply become another version of the Conservative Party.

Farage’s leadership style

Much of the discussion about Reform’s internal politics ultimately comes back to Farage.

He has built a political career around direct communication, strong personal branding and campaigns that challenge established parties.

That approach has helped create a recognisable Reform identity, but it also means that disagreements involving senior colleagues can quickly become interpreted through the question of Farage’s leadership.

In February, Farage insisted that Reform was no longer entirely dependent upon him. He argued that the party had developed senior figures with their own responsibilities and identities.

The comment was significant because it acknowledged a transition.

Reform was no longer simply a vehicle for one politician’s campaigns. It was becoming a more structured organisation with multiple prominent politicians.

That transformation is necessary if the party wants to maintain its political presence over the long term.

Jenrick’s role

Jenrick’s position is particularly important because of his background.

He has held ministerial office, competed for the Conservative leadership and served in senior opposition roles. His experience gives him knowledge of how government departments operate and how legislation is developed.

Within Reform, his Treasury responsibilities place him close to one of the most politically sensitive areas of any governing programme: taxation and public spending.

That also means that his policy statements can be scrutinised against Reform’s broader promises.

The party has attempted to combine tax reductions with commitments on public services, welfare and government spending. Turning those ambitions into a coherent governing programme requires detailed decisions about priorities and funding.

Jenrick’s background makes him one of the figures expected to engage with those questions.

Rumours of succession

Another issue surrounding Reform’s internal politics has been speculation about what happens when Farage eventually leaves the leadership.

The Guardian reported in July that some Reform figures viewed Jenrick and his allies with suspicion and believed they could be positioning themselves for a future leadership contest. Jenrick has denied such plotting.

It is important to distinguish speculation about succession from an actual leadership contest.

Farage remained Reform’s leader, and the reports did not establish that Jenrick had launched a formal challenge.

Nevertheless, the question is increasingly relevant because Reform has accumulated several politicians with national profiles.

Jenrick is one of them. Braverman is another. Tice has been associated with the party for years, while Yusuf has developed a prominent role in policy and campaigning.

The existence of several recognisable figures inevitably creates discussion about the party’s future.

A party changing rapidly

Reform’s development has been unusually rapid.

Its rise has brought new councillors, MPs, donors, campaign staff and politicians into the organisation. That expansion has created opportunities but also organisational pressures.

The Guardian reported in July that internal disagreements had become more visible, including arguments over policy, candidate selection and the party’s response to electoral setbacks.

Such disagreements are not necessarily unique to Reform. Large political parties routinely contain competing personalities and factions.

The difference is that Reform’s relatively recent emergence means its organisational structures are still developing.

The party is therefore attempting to build institutions while maintaining the political identity that helped it grow.

What the Jenrick-Farage relationship represents

The story surrounding Jenrick and Farage is ultimately part of a larger question about what Reform UK becomes as it grows.

Farage remains the party’s most recognisable leader and the politician most closely associated with its rise.

Jenrick represents a different political tradition: a former Conservative minister who moved into a party that had spent years attacking the Conservatives for failing to deliver its promises.

Bringing those two political histories together can strengthen Reform’s range of experience, but it can also generate disagreements over strategy, policy and leadership.

The reported concerns about Farage “p***ing everybody off” should therefore be understood within that wider context rather than treated as proof of a specific internal conflict without evidence.

What is clear is that Reform has moved beyond the stage where Farage is its only nationally significant figure.

Jenrick’s arrival is part of that transformation.

Whether the former Conservative can work effectively within Farage’s political structure, and whether Reform can integrate politicians from different backgrounds without losing its organisational cohesion, are questions that will continue to shape the party.

For now, the relationship between Farage and Jenrick illustrates both sides of Reform’s evolution: the party is becoming more politically substantial, while its expansion is bringing new personalities and competing political histories into the same organisation.