Farage pivots on economy - will his original supporters be in favour?

Nigel Farage has long known he would need to overhaul Reform UK's offer on the economy, not least because of the scale of the attack it faced over conference season.

According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, last year's manifesto plans would cost nearly £90bn per year, with spending increases alone of £50bn.

They claimed they would pay for these through £150bn per year of reductions in other spending, covering public services, debt interest and working-age benefits - eyewatering sums that the other parties felt left Reform UK exposed.

So in traditional Nigel Farage fashion, Monday comes the pivot.

Politics live: Farage predicts early general election in 2027

In a speech in the City, Farage said that large upfront tax cuts were no longer on the agenda because of the state of the economy.

He said significant but "sensible" deregulation was needed to take advantage of post-Brexit freedoms, and put public sector pensions and even the triple lock (up for consideration but no decisions have been made) on the table.

"We want to cut taxes. Of course we do. But we understand substantial tax cuts given the dire state of debt and our finances are not realistic," he told the 100-strong audience.

Read more politics news:Security scanners at train stations ruled outEx-councillor in court over Westminster blackmail allegation

Farage has to walk a fine line

He was unapologetic that he could not say when or by how much taxes would be lowered.

He said: "If I'm right and that election comes in 2027, then the economy will be in an even worse state than any of us in this room can even predict. How can anybody project on pensions and thresholds or any of those things between now and then?"

But he must walk a fine line - both claiming to be consistent as a politician while changing his stance.

And more broadly, given we have had "Brexit Nigel" and "trade-union Nigel" and "small state Nigel" and "nationalisation Nigel" - which all, I pointed out to him, line up like Barbies on a toy shelf today - I asked him why we should now suddenly trust "fiscal responsibility Nigel" and that this survives to and beyond the next general election?

His answer was instructive - saying that while his principles and ideology has been consistent, he conceded the practical application has had to evolve.

👉Listen to Politics at Sam and Anne's on your podcast app👈

He said: "I believe in pretty much the same sort of things I believed in 30 years ago. The difference is I now understand more than I did the role of the state in strategic industries.

"That's why Richard Tice and I went to Scunthorpe... Have I adapted over 30 years into believing that the country needs an industrial strategy?

"Yes. Do I believe that actually, in certain failing industries, you know, a short-term partial nationalisation where, by the way, the bondholders and shareholders get wiped out? It doesn't cost the government to do it."

Interesting insight

This is an interesting insight into a politician who was associated with a certain strand of conservatism. He hopes political evolution works in his favour.

But the history of candour in British politics does not always favour the brave, as George Osborne discovered in late 2009.

As Farage threatens a benefits crackdown and becomes the only party to put changes to the triple lock on the table, will Reform UK's original voters still be as strongly in favour?