For a party that repeatedly boasts of having “the most in-depth vetting procedure” in British politics, Reform UK’s decision to select Derek Bullock for Bolton Council is nothing short of extraordinary.
This is not a case of obscure historical comments buried deep in the internet. These are allegations and documented statements that have already led to Bullock being removed from the Conservative Party not once, but twice.
The first expulsion followed his sharing of material by the anti-Muslim activist Robert Spencer, alongside a remark aimed at Sayeeda Warsi describing her as “a cuckoo in the nest”. That phrase is not a casual political insult. It carries the unmistakable implication that a British Muslim politician is somehow alien or illegitimate within public life.
The second incident is even more disturbing. Following the Manchester Arena bombing, Bullock was linked to a post reading: “Shoot the Pakis on the spot.” Bullock has denied authorship and said the image was fake, but the allegation was serious enough for the Conservatives to disown and expel him.
Hope Not Hate’s reporting goes further, pointing to a pattern rather than an isolated lapse. According to its documentation, Bullock shared alarmist posts about the growth in British Muslim children, writing ominously that “the clock is ticking”. He allegedly referred to Muslims using the archaic spelling “Moslems”, terminology often associated with Islamophobic rhetoric and accused the Labour Party of using Muslims to replace white working-class voters.
If true, these are not simply “controversial views”. They speak to a worldview rooted in division, suspicion, and hostility towards entire communities.
That matters because councillors are not elected to inflame prejudice. They are elected to represent everyone in their ward: every family, every faith group, every background. The job requires balance, restraint, evidence-based decision-making, and a commitment to social cohesion.
Someone associated with repeated anti-Muslim commentary and racial hostility raises profound questions about whether they possess the judgement and temperament necessary for public office.
More broadly, Reform UK cannot simultaneously claim world-class vetting and then plead surprise when candidates’ histories come under scrutiny. Bullock’s record was not difficult to uncover. Much of it had already been publicly documented by anti-extremism researchers years ago.
This leaves voters with an unavoidable question: is this a failure of vetting or a conscious decision that such views are not disqualifying?
Either answer is deeply troubling.
A political party seeking public trust should aspire to put forward candidates of integrity and calibre. Selecting someone twice expelled by another major party over allegations of Islamophobic and racist conduct suggests standards that fall far below what local democracy deserves.
