From “Who Are You?” to “What Have You Done?” — How Nigel Farage’s Reform UK Might Hand Us a Muslim Prime Minister (and Nobody Voted for It)
I remember the moment vividly. Nigel Farage standing in the European Parliament, eyes burning with righteous indignation, and uttering the immortal words: “Who are you?” A question not just aimed at a faceless EU bureaucrat, but at the whole rotten edifice of supranational overreach. It was beautiful. It was bold. And to those of us who had grown weary of the establishment, it was a rallying cry. Farage wasn’t just a politician, he was a phenomenon. Pint in one hand, cigarette in the other, and a soundbite for every occasion.
Back then, I was all in. A proud Brexiteer, I backed the policies, met Nigel at a GB News event, and for a while thought he’d be Britain’s political redeemer. Finally, someone was going to stand up for the country, for real people, and for common sense. Or so I thought. As Reform began to grow, I was on the train.
But something has shifted. Slowly at first, then unmistakably. And now? It smells less like a revolution and more like a very slick bait-and-switch coming down the tracks.
The Curious Case of Chairman Mo
Let us begin with the man of the moment: Mohammed Zia Yusuf. A name that would once have sent Reform’s supporters into a frothing meltdown is now printed on their letterhead. Why? Because Mr Yusuf, despite being some random non-political nobody, is now Chairman of Reform UK.
And how did he achieve this lofty position, you ask? Years of grass-roots activism? Decades in the trenches fighting for British sovereignty?
No. He wrote a cheque.
A tidy little £200,000 donation later and voilà, Mr Yusuf is no longer just a generous donor; he is also a 50% controller of the party’s corporate vehicle. For context, Reform’s “subscribers” (not members — important distinction, more on that shortly) pay £25 a year. With around 220,000 paying subscribers, that’s about £5.5 million a year in income. So yes, £200,000 is a drop in the Reform bucket, and yet it bought him half the company. Why?
And yes, it is a company, not a traditional political party. That’s not a metaphor. It is literally structured as a private limited company. In fact, there are now two of them.
The Reform Company Structure
Here’s where things get murky, or if you prefer, hilariously absurd.
Reform UK originally existed as Reform UK Party Ltd, a private limited company incorporated on 23 November 2018, with Nigel Farage as the majority shareholder. This structure gave him ultimate control. However, in early 2025, amid growing criticism over the concentration of power in Farage’s hands, Reform UK underwent a restructuring.
Enter Reform 2025 Ltd, incorporated on 18 February 2025, as a private company limited by guarantee without share capital. This type of structure has no shareholders. Instead, it is controlled by guarantors, who in this case are none other than Nigel Farage and Zia Yusuf — also the only two directors of the company.
This change was pitched as a leap towards democratisation, a move away from private ownership. The narrative was that control would now rest with subscribers. But in truth, power still lies squarely with Farage and Yusuf.
Subscribers have no ability to vote for the leader, the chairman, or policy direction. The only mechanism to remove Farage or Yusuf is if more than 50 percent of all subscribers physically write in and request it. Not online, not via email — actual letters, posted the old-fashioned way. It’s less like member empowerment and more like a bureaucratic obstacle course.
The subscribers can donate, campaign, and put Reform signs in their windows — but they cannot decide anything that matters.
It is corporate control dressed up as a grass-roots rebellion. A Potemkin village of politics: business at the front, dictatorship at the back.
The Political Guillotining of Rupert Lowe
Now, for a dose of realpolitik.
Rupert Lowe, one of Reform’s most popular and vocal MPs, was unceremoniously booted from the party earlier this year. The official story? Allegations of “bullying” two women in the party office. These followed complaints made by the women and were investigated through a so-called ‘independent investigation’ commissioned by Reform itself, fronted by a barrister paid by the party. Hardly a neutral process, and many subscribers rightly saw it as a sham designed to remove a political threat. Those accusations have since been withdrawn, although the so-called ‘report’ still claimed they had some merit. As one might expect from a process paid for by the party, the outcome appeared to serve only one purpose: to discredit Rupert.
What did Rupert do? He had the audacity to give an interview to the Daily Mail in which he suggested that perhaps Reform should not revolve solely around Farage as a messiah. He proposed that the party might need to — brace yourself — reform itself. This apparently triggered a meltdown of Nigel’s fragile ego. Rupert had to go! He was suspended within days.
But that was not all. Just days after Rupert’s candid comments, Zia Yusuf suddenly remembered that Lowe had “threatened” him — three months earlier. And promptly ran to the rozzers to file a complaint. We are asked to believe the timing is, of course, entirely coincidental. Just as removing one of the party’s few genuinely principled voices was definitely not political. Chairman Mo, at 38, claimed he felt threatened by Rupert Lowe — who is 67 — but only remembered this three months later, just after Rupert suggested the party needed to stop treating Farage like the messiah.
The real issue? Rupert Lowe was outspoken about the need for mass deportations — a policy Farage now tiptoes around like it’s an unattended Quran in a boarding school. One might think a Muslim chairman might take exception to that, no?
Without Reform, Rupert Lowe would have been a traditional Conservative. In fact, he once was, until he left over Maastricht. Now, as an independent MP, he is doing serious work on the issues the main parties are too timid to touch, and he has a solid base of public support behind him. Whether he would rejoin the Conservatives under Jenrick remains to be seen, but I suspect he might. He has the experience, the courage, and the following to walk straight into a shadow cabinet role.
As Harold Wilson once said, a week is a long time in politics. By that measure, four years is enough time for the Conservatives to stage a full political resurrection as they did pre-79. Rupert Lowe could easily end up as a cabinet minister. That might be the moment Nigel finally realises what a mistake he made.
Nigel’s Centrist Pivot, Policy Flip-Flops and the Sudden Praise of Blair
Remember when Nigel used to say the unsayable? Lately, he has developed a strange habit of saying the unthinkable instead.
He now describes Keir Starmer as “a thoroughly nice bloke.” Yes, that’s right. The man presiding over 1,000 migrants entering the country per day is now being praised by Britain’s supposed immigration hawk.
Not only that, Farage has even gone out of his way to praise Tony Blair — the architect of New Labour, mass immigration, the Iraq war, and the man who made spin more important than substance. For years, Farage rightly pilloried Blair as the quintessential con man. But now? Well, apparently, he’s just another “big beast of British politics.”
So, what gives? Something changed in Nigel. Either he was bought by Muslims, he was threatened by the alphabet agencies, or someone’s sitting on a folder full of kompromat — because the man who once said what others wouldn’t now won’t say what needs to be said.
Farage now claims mass deportations are not feasible, and has refused to say whether those already here illegally will ever be removed. He also quietly dropped a previous pledge to launch an inquiry into the issue of Muslim grooming gangs, after making a very public promise in January 2025 to do just that. He told the media that if the government failed to act by the end of the month, Reform UK would step in and launch one themselves. Needless to say, the government did not act — and neither did Farage. The pledge quietly disappeared into the ether.
Farage now has more flip-flop than a Moroccan souk — one minute it’s mass deportations, the next it’s “not feasible.” One week he’s calling for Muslim grooming gang inquiries, the next he’s pretending he never mentioned it.
But someone did act. Rupert Lowe took up the mantle and launched a crowdfunded initiative to hold the inquiry himself. By April 2025, the fund had exceeded £484,000, and is on track to surpass £500,000 within days. Thousands of everyday people are contributing to make it happen — while Farage continues to waffle and wave from studio sofas.
It’s yet another reminder that when push comes to shove, Rupert leads, while Nigel prevaricates. This is a party built on the promise of ending illegal migration. Now, they’re suggesting that if the boats stop, maybe sometime after 2029, the passengers can stay.
The very raison d’être of Reform — to deal robustly with mass immigration — is now compromised.
In recent months, Nigel Farage’s relationships with key allies have become strained. In January 2025, Elon Musk publicly withdrew his support, saying Farage “doesn’t have what it takes” to lead Reform UK. Meanwhile, Farage’s criticism of President Donald Trump’s proposed peace deal with Russia has left him frozen out. Farage no longer enjoys the backing of influential figures like Musk and Trump.
Reform: The Big Bait-and-Switch?
And here is where things get interesting. What lies ahead?
What if the plan is not to win power and lead Britain as a conservative force?
What if the plan is to run a slick, populist campaign in 2029 on all the right-of-centre issues, draw in disillusioned Tory voters, take a chunk out of the Red Wall, and then… hand over the reins?
What if, after the election, Nigel steps down — too tired, too “not a detail man” (his words) — and suddenly Mr Yusuf is parachuted into a safe seat and crowned as leader? It’s debatable whether he would even need a seat. There’s no actual rule that says a Prime Minister has to be an MP. It’s just one of those quaint old conventions, like pretending the BBC is impartial. Alec Douglas-Home managed it in 1963 without a Commons seat and only bothered winning one twelve days later. So yes, there’s precedent.
Remember: Reform 2025 Ltd is not controlled by its subscribers. It is controlled by its two directors: Farage and Yusuf. You cannot vote for either of them. You cannot vote them out. They are there unless they choose not to be. Or unless a literal majority of all paying subscribers puts pen to paper and writes in to sack them, which is about as likely as the BBC hiring Tommy Robinson as a diversity consultant.
It is a leadership structure immune to change, fronted by a man who doesn’t want to be Prime Minister, supported by a man who could well end up being Prime Minister – who nobody voted for.
It is entirely feasible, then, that Britain could end up with a Muslim Prime Minister in 2029, elected by the very people who thought they were voting to reduce the influence of Islam. Nigel’s final backstab (and it’s a long list, Rupert Lowe, Douglas Carswell, Catherine Blaiklock, Kilroy-Silk, Ben Habib – the list goes on) before he retires to the US to flog gin, gold, eat insects in a jungle on TV, or whatever his latest grift is by then.
The Final Twist: Returning Home?
Like many Reform voters, pre and post-Rupertgate, I was once a proud Conservative. Thatcherite, free-market, small-state, strong-defence. I left when we voted for Liz Truss and got Rishi Sunak instead — a man we had explicitly rejected. It was a slap in the face of democracy. The party had lurched to the soggy centre, stuffed full of wets and wonks, and had presided over 14 years of drift, dithering, corruption and decline.
So I left. Reform was the only party talking about the things that mattered to me. For a time, it felt like home. But now, after Rupertgate, the rise of Chairman Mo Yusuf, and Nigel’s slide into centrism and duplicity, I find myself politically homeless once again.
But perhaps not quite. We live in hope.
I recently took another look at the Conservative Party to see if there was a glimmer of hope. And one name stood out: Robert Jenrick.
In my opinion, Jenrick is an old-school rising star. He is saying the right things. Talking tough on borders. Articulating policies that Farage used to champion before he went soft. And crucially, he looks like someone who actually wants the job — and understands it.
He recently lost a leadership bid to Kemi Badenoch by just 6.6%. And let us be honest — Kemi, while relatively competent and deserving of a Cabinet seat, is not leadership material. Jenrick is. He shows the potential to out-Farage Farage.
Why did he lose? Because thousands of Tory members left over the Sunak stitch-up. The base was hollowed out. Not enough real Conservatives remained to tip the balance.
But another leadership challenge is coming, I think. The party knows it must change or die.
So I have rejoined the Conservatives — solely to vote for Jenrick when the time comes. You must be a member for three months to vote in a leadership election. That gives us time. But not much.
If you think like I do, join now. Call it political insurance. Because if we don’t retake the party, the alternative is Reform UK with Farage as the face, Yusuf as chairman, and “Allahu Akbar” ringing out from Number 10 by 2029 as wee Nigel slips quietly off to Florida and Chairman Mo takes the reins. And no, you still won’t be able to vote him out. Not until 2034, by which point it might be the Islamic Reform Party.
And if that happens, we won’t just have lost a country — we’ll have handed it over to Islam without a shot fired. As a famous Sun headline once put it: last one out, turn off the lights.