Reform needs to learn the lessons of Makerfield

The Makerfield by-election defeat for Reform UK was another chastening experience. It means that in the five by-elections since the 2024 General Election, Reform has only won once, in Runcorn and Helsby in May 2025, despite victory looking more than achievable in at least three.

The reasons for Reform’s inability to win Makerfield go beyond the peculiarities of this particular constituency and the popularity of Labour’s victorious candidate, Andy Burnham. Reform is facing a similar predicament to that confronting other populist parties throughout Europe. Time and again, they have found it difficult to translate the growth of their electoral support into outright victories.

Reform must start learning some lessons from its recent ballot-box struggles.

Reform’s progress since 2024 has indeed been impressive. It has done remarkably well in harnessing the anger of the electorate – particularly in local elections. However, the populist surge in the UK does not mean that Reform will automatically go from strength to strength. Political setbacks are inevitable – something reflected in Reform’s poll rating, which has fallen by five percentage points from its late 2025 high.

If it is to regain its momentum, Reform must avoid blaming its Makerfield defeat on either local or specific factors. To claim, as some have, that widespread hatred for Keir Starmer and his government drove numerous voters to support Starmer’s likely successor, Burnham, doesn’t hold up. They still could have voted for Reform. After all, a Labour defeat would also have been a huge blow to the Labour government.

It is not enough to blame Restore Britain either. The divisive sectarianism of Restore certainly represents a threat to Reform’s political future. But the question that should be posed is why so many potential Reform voters decided to throw their lot in with Restore.

One reason for Restore picking up nearly seven per cent of the vote in Makerfield is that a lot of people are not sure what Reform stands for. It needs to formulate a comprehensive political programme that goes beyond its opposition to immigration and shows working people that it is the party for them.

There are no quick fixes here. However, one way that Reform can demonstrate that it takes people’s concerns seriously is by using its base in local government more effectively. People are right to ask the question of what difference Reform-run local councils make to their lives. It must find a way of providing a persuasive answer to this question.

Makerfield also showed that the quality of Reform’s candidates matters. With all the national attention directed at the Makerfield by-election it was clear Reform needed to field a first-class candidate capable of dealing with the enormous pressure Reform faced. Professionalising the party, vetting candidates more thoroughly and training them is a pre-condition for turning Reform into a party of government.

The main obstacle standing in the way of Reform’s electoral ambitions is tactical voting. The legacy parties are absolutely determined to prevent Reform from gaining serious political influence. Hence, when push comes to shove, Labour, the Greens and the Lib Dems will unite around the candidate best placed to defeat Reform. It is possible that even the Conservatives will join this unholy anti-populist alliance.

Tactical voting was certainly on display in Makerfield. Back in the 2024 General Election, the Green, Lib Dem and Tory vote in Makerfield collectively amounted to 22 per cent. Last week, it totalled just three per cent. This shows that Green, Lib Dem and even Tory voters were far more interested in preventing Reform from winning than in supporting their own parties.

Reform’s tactical-voting problem is all too familiar to observers of the political scene in France, Germany, the Netherlands and other parts of Europe. Like Reform, France’s Rassemblement National and Germany’s Alternative für Deutschland lead in the opinion polls. And, like Reform, they are continually blocked from achieving real power by a united front composed of the mainstream parties of the left and right.

The ruling classes and their political allies rightly fear the populist surge. The closer populist movements get to government, the more their opponents will unite to maintain the status quo. In the UK, the ‘anyone but Reform’ outlook is likely to be a formidable challenge.

But the mainstream parties’ united front is unlikely to undermine the growing demand for a populist voice. They can impede Reform but they can’t eliminate the growing demand for a party that gives voice to the needs of the people.

Time is still on Reform’s side. But its future success depends on it developing a positive, forward-looking political programme. The populist surge demands it.

Frank Furedi’s In Defence Of Populism is out now.