In a healthy media landscape, the Gill conviction would have ignited a national reckoning about Reform UK, Russian influence, and the vulnerability of British politics to foreign money and disinformation. Instead, the story slipped quietly beneath the surface, predictably overshadowed by Budget coverage and right-wing rage directed at Rachel Reeves.
If you want evidence that Britain’s overwhelmingly right-wing press is sympathetic to Reform UK, then look no further than its coverage of one of the most serious political scandals of the year – the conviction of Nathan Gill.
This week, Gill, former UKIP and Brexit Party MEP, and briefly leader of Reform in Wales in 2021, was sentenced to over ten years in prison after admitting eight counts of bribery linked to a pro-Russian influence campaign. Between December 2018 and July 2019, he accepted £40,000 to promote pro-Russia messaging, delivering statements in the European Parliament and placing opinion pieces in news outlets.
These were not minor lapses of judgement. They were actions that served the interests of a hostile foreign power. As Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb told Gill: “Your misconduct has ramifications far beyond personal honour… It erodes public confidence in democracy when politicians succumb to financial inducement.”
Yet during Reform’s campaign in the October Senedd by-election, when Nigel Farage was asked about Gill, he expressed shock but downplayed the significance: “Every single political party has a bad apple … these things happen,” he shrugged.
But this “bad apple” was not an obscure activist. Gill was a senior MEP in Farage’s parties, a trusted ally, and Farage’s chosen leader of Reform in Wales, until he resigned after failing to win a Senedd seat.
Now imagine if a senior Labour figure had been caught taking Russian bribes. The right-wing press would have led with weeks of front-page outrage. Instead, when it happened to a senior figure in Reform UK, many outlets avoided the story almost entirely.
The Guardian and Mirror were among the few that treated the case with the seriousness it deserved, with front page leads on Starmer’s call for Farage to investigate possible Russian influence within Reform.
Meanwhile, the New York Times went further than much of the UK press, reporting that Met Commander Dominic Murphy said police were investigating several former UK lawmakers in the European Parliament who may also have been instructed by Gill’s paymaster, Oleg Voloshyn, a figure connected to high-level Russian power networks around Viktor Medvedchuk, Dmitry Medvedev and ultimately Vladimir Putin. Murphy said he could not name the ex-politicians but that several had attended voluntary interviews.
Under mounting pressure, Reform finally put forward former chair Zia Yusuf to respond. When Sir Trevor Phillips asked why voters should trust a party whose senior figure had taken Russian money, Yusuf offered no real explanation, brushing off the Gill affair as “ancient history.”
Questioned by ITV News on why he hadn’t launched a wider investigation to ensure there were no further pro-Russia links, something Labour is demanding, Nigel Farage gave a baffling reply:
“I haven’t got a police force… I can’t access your phone message… your emails. Unless I can do that, I can’t investigate. You’ve got to have somebody with investigatory powers.”
Pressed on what questions he had personally put to Reform officials about the allegations, he said only: “I’ve asked everybody: have you ever taken money you shouldn’t have taken from anybody, and no one said yes.”
It’s a remarkably weak justification, and raises the question of what, exactly, Farage is worried about.
Gill didn’t act alone
Contrary to Yusuf’s claim, the issue is far from “historic.” It may well be just the tip of the iceberg for a party that claims it is ready to govern. As the court reportedly heard, Gill did not act alone.
The story took another turn when David Coburn, a former Brexit Party MEP, former UKIP Scotland leader, and ally of Nigel Farage, was named in WhatsApp messages between Gill and Oleg Voloshyn. The messages refer to payments allegedly made to Gill and to another MEP identified only as “D” and “David.” Confronted by the BBC at his château in northern France, Coburn stalled his car as he tried to drive away. Before leaving, he denied ever being paid to make a pro-Russia speech.
Beyond the Gill scandal, Reform’s senior ranks have also had their own brushes with pro-Russia sentiment.
Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey pointed to Farage’s paid appearances on Russia Today and his past praise of Putin, calling for a full investigation into Russian interference. Business secretary Peter Kyle likewise criticised Reform’s “Russia problem,” arguing that Farage has “often leant into Vladimir Putin” and deployed Kremlin talking points.
Farage disputes this, but the record tells an entirely different story. He has argued that the West, through NATO and “EU empire” expansion, provoked Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. In 2014, both he and Gill claimed that Islamic extremism was a greater threat to the West than Putin, and that the West had provoked Russia by supporting the Ukrainian uprising that toppled pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovych, which led to Putin reacting.
Farage famously warned: “When you poke the Russian bear with a stick, don’t be surprised when he reacts.”
Asked that same year which world leader he most admired, he replied: “As an operator… Putin.” He also praised Putin’s manoeuvres during the Syria crisis as “brilliant,” something which surely even Farage must regret now given the collapse of the Assad regime.
Russia and the Brexit shadow
No, questions about Russian interference and British politics do not begin or end with Nathan Gill. During the Brexit referendum, the unofficial Leave.EU campaign, fronted by Farage, engaged in discussions with representatives of the Russian government while Russia was under sanctions for invading Crimea and had been linked to the Salisbury poisonings.
Arron Banks and Andy Wigmore, key figures of the campaign, reportedly held multiple meetings with Russian officials and explored business opportunities including a proposal involving gold mines. Their extensive contacts were revealed in tens of thousands of emails obtained by journalist Isabel Oakeshott.
The Commons Intelligence and Security Committee ultimately examined Russian interference in UK politics. Its long-delayed 2020 Russia Report found an extraordinary lack of curiosity from the government and intelligence agencies about whether Russia had influenced the Brexit vote.
“Predictably, this lack of interest seemed most closely linked to a determination not to question the outcome of the 2016 Referendum,” wrote former Labour MP Ian Lucas in Byline Times.
‘Reverse ferret’
When Sky News’ Sophy Ridge suggested in an interview with Peter Kyle that Farage has condemned Putin in recent years, Kyle responded that Farage only changed his tune when it was impossible to ignore the Russian danger.
“More recently when the entire country has realised just how dangerous Vladimir Putin is, of course Nigel Farage does a reverse ferret as he often does.”
“Nigel Farage will talk out of both sides of his mouth, but he has been consistent about one thing in the past over many many years and that’s his support and admiration for Vladimir Putin.”
Across Europe, far-right politicians are undergoing their own strategic pivot against Russia. Having previously courted the Kremlin, many now distance themselves as they seek mainstream power. As Politico reports, even leaders of Germany’s AfD, long accused of Kremlin sympathy, are now disciplining colleagues for attending events in Russia. Similar dynamics are playing out in France, Italy and Romania.
Farage is no exception. But his attempted repositioning, it could be argued, has been aided immeasurably by a media climate that prefers to look the other way.
The scandal that should have sparked a reckoning
In a healthy media landscape, the Gill conviction would have ignited a national reckoning about Reform UK, Russian influence, and the vulnerability of British politics to foreign money and disinformation.
Instead, the story slipped quietly beneath the surface, predictably overshadowed by Budget coverage and right-wing rage directed at Rachel Reeves.
And so, Farage, a man whose far-right party now dominates the polls, and who could become prime minister if an election were held today, sails on unscathed.
Perhaps the most important question now is not whether Gill was a “bad apple,” but whether his conviction is merely the tip of the iceberg, and whether the UK’s right-wing media is helping to ensure we never find out.
Gabrielle Pickard-Whitehead is author of Right-Wing Watch
Left Foot Forward doesn’t have the backing of big business or billionaires. We rely on the kind and generous support of ordinary people like you.
You can support hard-hitting journalism that holds the right to account, provides a forum for debate among progressives, and covers the stories the rest of the media ignore. Donate today.
leftfootforward.org (Article Sourced Website)
#Hugging #Russian #bear #Reforms #Moscow #links #media #response