Despite swirling rumors and speculation, Tory chairman Richard Holden remained tight-lipped on appointing Nigel Farage as the UK’s ambassador to the US.
This idea has been floated by some concerned Conservative MPs, eyeing a strategic move to neutralize Farage’s potential to disrupt the Tory campaign by rallying support for Reform UK in the upcoming general election.
An anonymous MP from the Red Wall expressed to Politico that Farage’s strong ties with Donald Trump could serve as a valuable bridge between the two nations. The suggestion was to award Farage a peerage with the ambassadorial role as a strategic move to secure electoral advantages for the Conservatives.
However, when Sky News presenter Sophy Ridge pressed on the feasibility of such an arrangement, Holden skillfully steered the conversation away from a direct response.
Ridge highlighted the growing anxiety among Conservative ranks, visible through the suggestion to potentially placate Farage with a high-profile diplomatic position, thereby mitigating the Reform UK threat.
Despite Ridge’s efforts to extract a clear stance on Farage’s speculative appointment, Holden deflected, instead emphasizing the binary choice facing voters at the next election between a Conservative government led by Rishi Sunak and a Labour government under Keir Starmer.
He sidestepped the query on Farage, suggesting that Farage and Reform UK’s decisions were independent of Conservative strategy while hinting that any votes for Reform would inadvertently support Labour’s bid for power.
Ridge’s follow-up, seeking clarity on offering Farage a diplomatic role, only garnered Holden’s view that the topic was not of primary concern among the electorate.
In response, a spokesperson for Reform UK dismissed the notion of Farage accepting such an offer as ludicrous, emphasizing that Farage’s political integrity and longstanding commitment to his principles made the idea of a political bribe untenable.
The spokesperson clarified that any historical opportunities for Farage to accept a peerage or ambassadorial role would have been in recognition of his achievements, not as leverage for political convenience.
Once more, this dialogue has sparked considerable debate, revealing the strategic maneuvers within political circles and the challenges of handling internal party dynamics amid a growingly competitive electoral environment.