A Daily Mail opinion column this week argued that a formal pact between the Conservative Party and Reform UK is the only sure way to prevent Labour from consolidating power, after a string of defections, conference controversies and growing unease within the Tory ranks.
Columnist Dan Hodges wrote that former Conservative MP Nadine Dorries’s recent defection to Reform and her public call for an electoral agreement between Nigel Farage and former prime minister Boris Johnson underscored the potential for a right‑of‑centre alliance. Reform officials responded angrily to the suggestion: Zia Yusuf, Reform’s head of policy, told the Mail that the party would not welcome Johnson and called him "one of the worst PMs in history." Hodges said the debate reflects deeper questions about whether the right remains too divided to defeat Labour.
Hodges, reporting from Reform’s conference in Birmingham, described a polished and professionally run gathering but said some speakers and moments highlighted the party’s difficulty in controlling its fringe elements. He noted speeches by Aseem Malhotra, an adviser to U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who asserted a link between COVID‑19 vaccines and cancers in the royal family without offering supporting evidence, and by Lucy Connolly, who was introduced at the conference after her recent release from prison following a conviction for inciting racial hatred. Hodges wrote that Connolly was presented as "Britain’s favourite political prisoner." A More in Common poll cited in the column found that 52 percent of respondents believed Connolly’s sentence was correct or too lenient, 35 percent thought it was too harsh, and just 18 percent said mainstream politicians should openly associate with her.
Hodges portrayed Reform as occupying a potent position in current opinion polling, saying the party enjoyed a sustained double‑digit lead in some surveys while Farage himself averaged in the low 30s. Yet he cautioned that Farage’s current polling, driven by midterm voter anger over issues such as migration and the cost of living, has not produced the broad electoral coalition that Boris Johnson achieved during his time in office. Hodges argued Johnson was able to attract wider and more durable electoral support, citing what he described as Johnson’s appeal to so‑called "Red Wall" voters, traditional Conservative supporters and disaffected centrists. He wrote that Johnson at his height commanded support from about 44 percent of the public, and that his approach was framed as optimistic and inclusive rather than purely oppositional.
Within the Conservative Party, Hodges said unease about leadership and strategy persists. He wrote that Kemi Badenoch, who became Conservative leader after the party’s disappointing 2024 results, has struggled to establish herself as the central figure in national debate and that some colleagues are searching for alternatives. Quoting a senior Conservative, Hodges reported the comment, "This can’t go on," about the party’s current standing. The column named potential figures who have been discussed as replacements, calling Robert Jenrick energetic but erratic and James Cleverly statesmanlike but lacking broad public recognition.
Hodges argued the political calculus is complicated by Labour’s own volatility. He noted that while Labour leader Keir Starmer’s popularity has fallen from earlier highs, internal pressure on Labour leadership could precipitate a change before the next general election. Hodges wrote that contenders such as Wes Streeting or Andy Burnham could alter the party’s public appeal and change the electoral outlook, potentially undercutting any benefit a Conservative‑Reform pact might deliver.
The column also highlighted concerns inside Labour rooms about a potential right‑of‑centre union. Citing a comment from a government minister quoted in the piece, Hodges said one senior minister warned that "so long as the Right is split, we still have a chance. But if someone finds a way of bringing them together, we’ll be finished. Possibly for good." Hodges concluded that any transformative partnership would likely hinge on whether Farage and Johnson—two high‑profile figures with clashing styles and ambitions—could accommodate each other.
Political analysts cautioned that while a pact could alter electoral arithmetic, such an arrangement would face practical and strategic hurdles. Parties entering formal or informal alliances must reconcile policy differences, manage activist and voter reactions, and navigate legal and logistical challenges under the United Kingdom’s electoral system. Observers also noted that association with fringe or controversial figures can erode mainstream support, a point underscored by the poll results on Connolly cited in Hodges’s column.
The debate in the Conservative and Reform ranks comes amid wider questions about how centre‑right politics in Britain will respond to voter discontent over living standards, public services and immigration. Hodges framed the dispute as both tactical and existential: whether the right can set aside personality conflicts and competing ambitions to form a united front, or whether continued fragmentation will leave Labour in place even amid its own internal divisions.
Hodges’s column represents an influential voice in the ongoing discussion among right‑of‑centre politicians and commentators. It reflects the urgency felt by some Conservatives and Reform supporters who believe an alliance is the only viable route back to government, and it underscores the obstacles—both ideological and reputational—that would need to be overcome for such an alliance to gain broad electoral traction.