Farage’s City of London speech: 3rd November 2025

Farage Speech to City of London

Farage ditches Reform’s tax giveaways in bid for credibility.

Reform UK are fond of their Monday events to take control of the political narrative at the start of the week. This one, in the City of London, was surely going to be one of the most substantive of 2025. The objective was clear. Wipe the slate clean of past populist promises of huge tax cuts and write the new chapter of Reform UK as the party of fiscal certitude and responsible economics. Billed as their “Economic Vision Speech” the speech Farage delivered ran to a little over an hour, including a Q&A section at the end.

Full transcript of Farage’s Economic Vision speech.

Introductory remarks

Good morning everybody. Thank you for coming. The Tories and Labour have wrecked the public finances. Reform UK will restore them. For decades now, the Tories and Labour have suffocated the British economy, wasted billions of pounds every year prioritising foreign citizens, given us some of the most expensive energy costs in the world, and raised tax as a percentage of GDP to the highest levels since World War II.

Let’s talk about the Tory record. They claim to be the party of fiscal responsibility, the ones who help us live within our means. They managed to run a deficit in every single one of their 14 years in power. They tripled the national debt and made everyone miserable in the process, and they blew up people’s mortgages for good measure.

Labour are just as bad. According to Capital Economics, Rachel Reeves is raising taxes on British people after the coming budget at a faster rate than any chancellor in 55 years. Unemployment is already at a four-year high and trending higher, not counting the millions not actively seeking work. Inflation remains sticky, well above the Bank of England’s target, which is why so many are struggling with the cost of living. Supermarket prices keep rising, rents are going up, mortgages never seem to get cheaper, and energy bills are frightening to open.

This country has some of the highest industrial energy costs in the world. There is no example of a high-growth economy with energy prices like Britain’s. The political class is running the economy off a cliff. Britain is headed for economic catastrophe unless we urgently change course. The warning lights on sovereign debt are already flashing. Thirty-year borrowing costs are not far off multi-decade highs, and almost weekly we hear of another multinational pulling investment from the UK.

As prime minister, Nigel Farage will restore the public finances and revive confidence in the United Kingdom. Despite the best efforts of the political class, we still have a lot going for us. Three of the world’s top ten universities are here. We have more than our fair share of brilliant people, and millions of strivers and grafters—men and women who set their alarms and rise early to work. As prime minister, Nigel Farage will be their champion. Without further ado, the leader of Reform UK, Nigel Farage.

Nigel Farage

Thank you very much, and good morning everybody. Another depressing budget looms—another tax-raising budget, another budget that lacks the courage to cut public spending. Pessimism among businesses, savers and asset-holders has rarely been lower in modern times.

For years we’ve lived under an illusion, refusing to face how much of an economic mess we’re in. We kid ourselves with GDP growth, but there wouldn’t have been any without mass migration on a previously unthinkable scale and excess government borrowing. On an individual basis, mass migration has made the average Briton poorer. In 2024 we saw record numbers coming in while GDP per capita fell. Productivity has been poor for the best part of 20 years. Importing masses of cheap, unskilled foreign labour may have cut big firms’ wage bills in the short term, but it was catastrophic for training and educating our own workforce. The public sector still imagines working from home is good for productivity; we see the results.

What we don’t discuss—at least the Conservatives and Labour don’t—is the level of national debt. Cutting a deficit is not the same as cutting debt. Over 14 years, our national debt increased more than two-and-a-half times. It’s now accelerating. The OBR’s estimate for borrowing this year has jumped from £77bn to £130bn and rising. Our debt has risen faster than any comparable Western country; the debt-to-GDP ratio is up nearly 60% in 20 years. Debt interest is over £100bn a year—more than the defence budget—and markets are getting nervous, as seen in 10- and 30-year gilt yields.

At this rate, within two budgets the markets will force the chancellor into a genuine austerity budget. The Labour left won’t buy it, which is why I predict a general election caused by economic collapse in 2027. Meanwhile we continue to de-industrialise at pace: chemicals, refining, cement, heavy engineering, steel—much of it is going. China is the beneficiary in almost every sector because, for ideological reasons, we’ve chosen to have the most expensive industrial energy prices in the world.

The benefits bill has ballooned to over £300bn—more than the NHS and defence combined. Work often doesn’t pay. One of my frustrations is that Brexit has been squandered: the chance to sensibly deregulate and become globally competitive has been missed. Regulation and regulators are now worse than at the time of the referendum, across sectors from financial services to fishing.

A fundamental problem is who runs the country. We’re run by human-rights lawyers, not entrepreneurs. Virtually nobody on the front bench has taken a business risk or met a payroll. Departments are led by people whose only qualification is being an MP, reshuffled just as they learn the brief. Reform will not just think differently; we will do differently. We’ll sweep away outdated conventions and become the most pro-business, pro-entrepreneurship government in modern times. We’ll bring in advisers and ministers with real sector expertise and champion a change of attitude toward hard work, making money and success—starting in schools, celebrating national champions and role models who started with nothing.

It’s fitting to give this speech in a historic banking hall in the City of London, a place I know well. Financial services are still Britain’s biggest industry, yet we’re in decline, constrained by an EU rulebook interpreted with over-zealous regulation. Costs are too high and we’re losing business to New York and Asia. The FCA now has 5,000 staff—up from 2,000 when I left the City—and still we cling to outdated practices like stamp duty on share transactions. The FCA pushes diversity agendas as if that were the core of competitiveness; what matters is merit.

Banks are forced to implement multiple EU money-laundering directives. The result has been de-banking hundreds of thousands of individuals and tens of thousands of businesses, while obvious cash-based risks proliferate. Secondary lending is exploding and could come back to bite us. We’ve ignored the burgeoning global markets in digital assets, stablecoins and crypto. The City succeeded by innovating and taking risks; we’ve done none of it. We should lead in these 21st-century sectors.

We will sensibly deregulate a rulebook written for the EU, not for London, and open up debate with the Bank of England. Monetary policy is independent; fiscal consequences are not. Quantitative tightening is on course to lock in vast losses with major fiscal impact. We need a total rethink of the FCA: markets require sensible, trusted regulation—not layers of cost. Financial services employ hundreds of thousands across the country, not just in Canary Wharf and Mayfair. The whole economy must encourage innovation, ambition and risk-taking. If risks go wrong, it’s not for government to bail out; shareholders and bondholders take the hit.

To be that kind of economy, we need the right people in the country—the risk-takers and builders. Yet an exodus is underway: thousands of high-net-worth individuals and tens of thousands of others leaving for opportunities abroad. Non-dom changes have been a self-inflicted act of financial stupidity. These people pay UK taxes, employ others, invest and spend here—yet we push them away while Milan, Lisbon, Athens and Dubai welcome them. We propose a “Britannia Card”: a one-off payment for non-doms to come back, settle here and pay all relevant UK-source taxes. Wealthy asset-holders are scared by retrospective tax changes and even talk of exit taxes. Young professionals caught in tax traps are leaving; we want them back. If the rich leave and don’t pay tax, the less well-off will pay more—simple as that. Law and order in London must also be fixed.

Re-industrialising Britain requires tackling energy. Net-zero policies, pushed without proper debate, have exported emissions and driven prices up. UK electricity prices are multiples of those in the US and higher than many European competitors. The grid cannot cope with intermittent renewables without trillions in upgrades; we even pay wind turbines to switch off when it’s too windy. We will scrap net-zero subsidies, reduce energy costs, and remove punitive North Sea taxes to get domestic production moving, including new onshore gas where viable. We’ve signalled that if we’re in government we will scrap AR7 wind contracts that lock in higher prices. Long-term we support nuclear, but delivered efficiently, learning from countries like South Korea, not repeating the delays and cost overruns at Sizewell and Hinkley.

Our current politicians don’t understand business or money—HS2 proves it. We will bring in seasoned professionals with real expertise. Government currently listens only to multinationals; yet small businesses are the engine of UK growth. They’ve been hammered by corporation tax hikes, new quarterly reporting burdens, and IR35 rules that stifle innovation and push experienced workers into early retirement. We will be the party of small business and risk-takers. Thriving businesses are good for workers; small firms often treat staff like family, riding out tough times together. We are on the side of “alarm-clock Britain” and want people to be better off working than on benefits.

There have been misunderstandings about our stance on benefits, particularly my comments on the two-child cap. I proposed removing the cap for British working couples, specifically lower-paid couples where both work and childcare costs are prohibitive. That’s a pro-family policy. We have already announced welfare reductions: for example, changes to PIP so that non-major anxiety cases do not qualify, and requiring in-person, independent reassessments for disability claims. There has been a 50% increase in disability claims in five years; we are over-diagnosing, writing off young people and replacing their potential with cheap imported labour. Indefinite Leave to Remain cohorts will soon become eligible for lifelong benefits; some estimate very large lifetime costs. We are proposing some of the biggest benefit savings you’ve heard.

We will substantially cut the benefits bill, reduce the size of the public sector, and address public-sector pension liabilities and fees. On cost of living, we will cut energy bills; we believe we can take a sensible amount off everyone’s electricity bill. On population, moving toward net-zero migration would ease pressure on rents and house prices; we will commit to the biggest programme of genuinely affordable housing in decades.

We will cut spending, encourage growth and entrepreneurship, and—when responsible—cut taxes. Right now, given the state of the finances, large tax cuts are not realistic. We would start by removing inheritance tax from family farms and family-run businesses and raising thresholds to help people escape the part-time work trap. The economy is in a worse state than before the 2024 election, but be in no doubt: we are pro-business, want work rewarded, and will restore confidence and a culture that values work, money and success, with higher-quality people in charge of areas they actually understand. Thank you very much.

Q&A

BBC (Harry Farley): A few months ago, you talked about tax cuts worth billions. Now you say tax cuts are not realistic. How can people trust you when you reverse promises?

Farage: I didn’t say we couldn’t afford any tax cuts; I said we couldn’t afford huge ones. We mentioned a couple we still support. We’re being mature and not over-promising given the dire public finances. We want a smaller state, lower benefits spending, a smaller civil service and control of public-sector pensions—but substantial tax cuts must wait until markets see we have these under control.

ITV News (Joel Hills): Are you saying you’ll cut public-sector pensions?

Farage: We’ve found local-government pension funds pay exorbitant fees and are badly administered. Our aim is to save money and deliver better value. Richard Tice will set out more detail shortly.

Sky News (Sam Coates): You reinvent yourself—why should we trust that “fiscal responsibility” Nigel will last?

Farage: I’ve believed broadly the same things for 30 years. I better understand now the role of the state in strategic industries. In failing sectors, short-term partial nationalisation—wiping out shareholders and bondholders—can be justified. We must be competitive and foster a culture of hard work; business success is essential for national success.

GB News (Christopher Hope): Will you still raise the basic income-tax threshold to £20,000? And what about the pension triple lock?

Farage: We will raise thresholds, but the timing and scale must reflect economic reality. If an election is in 2027, the economy may be worse than we can predict now. We’ll use our influence to push government to ease burdens on small business and working people, but exact numbers depend on conditions nearer the time.

Daily Mail (Sam Merriman): Is the minimum wage too high? Would you lower or scrap it?

Farage: There’s an argument it’s too high for younger workers, especially with the lower NIC threshold. Do one or the other: lift the NI threshold or lower the youth minimum wage. The key is to help young people get that crucial first job.

The Times (Aubrey Allegretti): You talked about nationalising half the water industry and parts of steel. How much would it cost?

Farage: Nationalisation is an emergency tool. In steel, without action we’d have no primary production. Energy prices are the root problem. In water, Thames Water has lost credibility; our plan would wipe out shareholders and seek new partners—so it needn’t cost taxpayers.

The Sun (Ryan Sabey): What about the cost of new employment-rights legislation?

Farage: Big business can absorb it; small firms can’t. Applying the same burden to a company with three employees hurts competition, choice and innovation. Small firms provide 60% of private-sector jobs; we must give them a voice.

The Guardian (Pippa Crerar): Who would be chancellor? Do you still support PR? Are you moderating promises to look mainstream?

Farage: We’re being realistic about the economy. Team building is ongoing; we’re bringing in people with expertise and will announce more soon. This isn’t a one-man band. On tax thresholds and benefits, we set out aspirations, but responsible policy depends on the fiscal position. Richard Tice will deliver a major speech at Bloomberg on the 5th.

Media Reaction to the Speech

Media coverage of Farage’s speech was broadly mixed, reflecting both recognition of his shifting tone and continuing scepticism about substance and credibility. On the one hand, major news organisations such as Reuters noted that Reform UK appears to be “watering down tax pledges in a pitch for economic credibility,” signalling a possible pivot toward fiscal responsibility. In contrast, broadsheets like The Guardian described the same speech as a “chameleon show,” arguing that despite fresh rhetoric, the underlying populist dynamics remain unchanged.

Financial-press commentary from the Financial Times highlighted how the speech is shaping the response of mainstream parties—Labour’s pledge of a “patriotic” fight was cited as a direct response to the Reform narrative. Global media also weighed in: for example, Time set the speech within Farage’s broader international profile, noting how US coverage frames him as a Trump-aligned free-speech provocateur.

Meanwhile, tabloid-style and watchdog outlets raised concerns about consistency and social impacts of specific ideas: Byline Times flagged his suggestion to lower the minimum wage for younger workers as controversial, and Sky News questioned whether the new fiscally cautious tone will endure once electoral pressure builds.

Taken together, the coverage paints a picture of a speech that has elevated Reform UK’s profile and forced rivals to respond—but also of a party still wrestling with questions of credibility, coherence and policy detail beneath a bold rhetorical surface.

Further Reading — Media Reactions

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *