Police confirmed they are assessing claims that Reform UK leader Nigel Farage violated spending rules during last year’s general election campaign.
Mr Farage may have violated election law by improperly reporting local campaign costs incurred in his Clacton seat, according to a former member of his team.
Richard Everett, a former Reform councillor, said he had submitted documents to the Metropolitan Police that he claims show an overspend.
Essex Police on Monday said they were now looking into the allegations, following a referral by Scotland Yard.
The force said in a statement: ‘We are assessing a report relating to alleged misreported expenditure by a political party in connection with the 2024 general election, following a referral to us by the Met Police.’
A Reform spokesman denied any wrongdoing, claiming the allegations came from a ‘disgruntled former councillor’ who was kicked out of the party.
Documents show that Reform came within £400 of the legal election spending limit of £20,660 in Clacton, the Essex seaside constituency won by Mr Farage in July 2024.
But Mr Everett claims that figure excludes some costs, including the refurbishment of a blue Reform-themed bar in the campaign office.
He also alleges the party failed to declare the loan of an armoured Land Rover that was used by Mr Farage during a campaign rally on Clacton Pier as a donation.
Mr Farage and his election agent, Peter Harris, may be held personally accountable in court for violating electoral law if Mr Everett’s allegations are proven true.
Mr Everett – whose function included the monitoring of election expenses and chaperoning Mr Farage about during the campaign following his defection from the Conservatives – reportedly said he believes Reform exceeded the spending limit by about £9,000, but he added that Mr Farage was ‘blissfully unaware’ of the omissions.
Under electoral law, campaign spending is highly regulated and is divided into expenditure by a national political party and by individual candidates.
National parties have increased spending limitations, and, while they can purchase materials used locally, they must not directly promote a specific candidate using a photograph or the name of a particular area.
It is understood that a dossier sent to the Met includes Reform’s official spending submission, photographs of various campaign materials bought by the party and expenses receipts.
‘Because of my experience as an agent, I’ve done many of these returns myself, so I know what is meant to be on them,’ Mr Everett told The Daily Telegraph.
‘In this particular case, there was a spending limit of £20,660.72. So that’s the amount you’re allowed to spend on the election. In this return that Peter Harris has produced, he says that we spent £20,299.80.
‘I do not think that that is an accurate figure. The reason why I think that is because of a number of items that were either missing on the return or wrong on the return.’
Tory chairman Kevin Hollinrake has called for a ‘full investigation’ into the allegations, adding: ‘We all have an obligation to play by the rules to ensure that our elections are free and fair.
‘Clearly, there must now be a full investigation by the Electoral Commission and the police to establish the facts and ensure whether or not Farage and the Reform Party have followed the law.’
A Reform spokesman said: ‘These inaccurate claims come from a disgruntled former councillor.’
The spokesman added: ‘The party denies breaking electoral law. We look forward to clearing our name.’
Labour Party chair Anna Turley said: ‘Nigel Farage needs to reassure the public that he and his party will cooperate fully with the police and put all the evidence they need on the table.
‘Electoral fraud is a very serious crime which fundamentally undermines our democracy.
There have been several attempts to discredit Nigel Farage, and with all these evil forces at work and gloomy times ahead, I’m sure there will be many more.
Although I don’t support Farage, it appears that there is a strategy in place to prevent him from leading his party into the election, but like all parties, they’re subject to some sort of scrutiny.
The problem is that they will target anyone who speaks the truth and draws attention to the grave injustices being done to our nation and its citizens. Simply put, if you have an opinion, you are an enemy of the state!
THE MONTHLY MOSQUITO 