Why has Nigel Farage taken £5m from a crypto billionaire?

A party which tells us they're heading for Downing Street, a party tipped to top the poll in next week's English local elections. Reform. We now know that Nigel Farage's party has been given over£12 million from a single donor, a Thai-based British businessman, crypto billionaire, Christopher Harborn. And we also now know, courtesy of the Guardian, that it isn't just enormous sums flowing into party coffers.

It has been revealed this week that just before Nigel Farage was elected an MP in twenty twenty four, Mr Harborne gave Mr Farage a present. of five million pounds never before disclosed. This is a total financial commitment from one man to reform and Farage personally of at least 17 million pounds over barely two years.

On today's show then, how could it be that reform, a party we are told that is preparing for government, could become so dependent on a Thai based crypto billionaire? What does it say about the way that we fund politics? About politics to come and what, if anything, does Mr Harborn want for all that money? Welcome to the newsagents.

With the now deputy leader Richard Tice in charge. And then, after much speculation, Nigel Farage made yet another one of his fabled reentries into British politics, announcing that he would stand in the general election of ninety four, having only previously just said that he wouldn't.

Boosted by this success though, they've accumulated a load of former Tory cabinet ministers and MPs to the cause. It is impressive stuff, politically speaking. And the way reform like to portray it is as a people's army, a bottom up revolt against the political classes.

Well it turns out unusually, overwhelmingly, reform has depended on one man. This guy, Christopher Harborn, or should I say, Chakrit Secumcrit, a British citizen, but now Thai based with a tie name, billionaire, who has made much of his money in crypto. He's a highly private person. But here he is, talking about his wellness retreat, Kamalaya, on Kosamui.

history to reform. Some nine million pounds. Yes, you heard that right. Nine million pounds. And he wasn't done. Just before 2025's end, he donated a further three million to the party, bringing the total financial support to reform from Harborn to a minimum.

of twelve million pounds in just one year. Now that is a huge number in absolute terms, but it's massive relatively too, because bear in mind that the total amount raised for all UK parties in twenty twenty five, according to the Electoral Commission, was some sixty five million pounds. That means that the 12 million Harborne gay reform was more or less about a fifth of all the money donated to all the political parties in Britain in 2025.

Consider that in the quarter where Harbor made the second£3 million donation, the party's next biggest donation reforms was a relatively meager£250,000. So the next lot of donations for reform behind Harborn are about twelve times smaller than the sort of money that Harborn is giving the party.

In twenty twenty five, reform raised about eighteen million overall. Twelve million came from Harborn. So in other words, one donor was responsible for two thirds of the party's money. Now as I say, Big money donations are not unusual in British politics, but it is unusual for a party to raise so much money from one person, and it has led to questions. said about what influence and power it might provide Mr Harborne if reform were to get into government.

This is not least because Christopher Harborn has been described as a crypto billionaire, and it has been noted that reform, though they and he deny any link here, is perhaps the most pro crypto of any major British political party. Farage has talked about making the UK a crypto friendly environment. He's criticized what he sees as an overregulation of digital assets.

And Farage has even personally backed a crypto venture, reportedly to the tune of two hundred fifteen thousand pounds from his own money, headed up by Liz Truss's former Chancellor, Quasiquate. Sack BTC.

And I've been urging for years that London should embrace it. We should become a global trading centre for this stuff under proper regulation. And the Governor of the Bank of England earlier this week indicated that nobody No individual should be allowed to have more than ten thousand pounds worth of stable coins, to which some of my friends have said, should we just emigrate?

Personally, to Nigel Farage, before the general election, a previously undisclosed sum. The Tories have referred Farage to the parliamentary authorities, asking for a standards investigation.

o'r donatio, ac Nigel Farage yn ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud ei wneud Whether it's a gift or not is irrelevant according to the rules, and he was before he became a member of Parliament, but it was in the twelve months prior to bec him becoming a Member of Parliament.

And we know of uh section five of the House of Commons Code of Conduct states that you must declare all all that kind of income. It's very important that other parliamentarians in debate ymwneud â phobl sy'n ymwneud â phobl sy'n ymwneud â phobl sy'n ymwneud â phobl sy'n ymwneud â phobl sy'n ymwneud â phobl.

I think the other background to this is from a cryptocurrency billionaire in um the person Christopher Harbor who made this donation and we know that reform, for example, have brought forward policies that are very beneficial.

to cryptocurrency those people involved in the cryptocurrency sector, uh tax breaks and the like, which would be very, very beneficial. So it would be wrong on two scores. Basically the fact he hasn't declared them, he hasn't followed the rules, and potentially Rydyn ni'n gwneud bod Nigel Farage wedi gwneud rhywbeth neu wedi gwneud rhywbeth, byddai'n gwneud rhywbeth.

Um he's uh a a well established uh political donor in in the UK.

Um but what I have uncovered is that he also made a gift of five million pounds to Nigel Farage weeks before um uh Farage announced that he would be standing as an MP in the twenty twenty four election. Um so it's um a really interesting development I think in in building up a picture about the relationship between the two.

This is a donation that he's given to Nigel Farage when Nigel Farage in that period again listeners and viewers will remember, but when there was a lot of speculation as to whether he would stand again for reform, because Richard Tice, his now deputy, was then leader of reform, in the months and weeks before the general election in july twenty twenty four, this five million pound gift, present, was given to Farage personally during that time.

Um and then um by June third it was revealed, um, trailed and then he made a public announcement on June fourth. um of twenty twenty four that he was going to stand, that he was going to stand for the seat of Placton on C. And if you cross your minds back, you'll also remember that there was a candidate that reform had put in place. This was how last minute things were. Um and um that that candidate was then replaced by Nigel Farage.

Um, and before this story we knew absolutely nothing about it. Um, it hadn't been declared anywhere either to the Electoral Commission, or um or or to the the they call it the register of members' interests, but um the um the parliamentary log that is kept of all the financial interests and benefits that MPs may receive.

um the security threats that um Nigel Farage has received. Um it is you know, and just to be really clear on one point, you know, MP's safety and the safety of people operating in the political sphere in the country is really serious.

we have seen MPs lose their lives in the line of carrying out their public works. So it's certainly the case that there are security issues that people may face. I think there are um Still though, some some questions to ask about um why the money might have been given in this way for security purposes.

ond Nigel Farage's account is he said this is to keep me safe and secure for the rest of my life. That's why Christopher Harbon gave it to me and he said Christopher was an ardent supporter of his. So that's the account that Nigel Farage has given and um uh Christopher Harborn has confirmed in a separate interview he said, you know, it was for security. That so that's that's their position. Um that's their explanation for the gift. And they said it was unconditional.

um and unrelated to whether or not he would or would not stand again. Um and that it was from a position where they've said, you know, at this time he wasn't um politically active. You know, they said he'd he'd essentially retired from politics at that time.

for him personally to get back on the front line of British politics. He said at that time that he wanted to preserve his freedom to go and campaign in the US presidential election which is, if I recall correctly he said was of far more importance than the UK general election. But this donation or or gift is not really a donation, this this this gift takes place shortly after that.

And then Farage does say that he wants to go back in. Now as you say, they say that it's unconditional or unrelated. But the timing is quite striking, isn't it?

um that actually happened quite some time after the gift was made. So um we know it was weeks before he announced he was going to stand as an MP. He made that announcement in June twenty twenty four. The firebombing in incident he described actually happened in twenty twenty five.

So um there is there is a there is a there's a gap there, but he has said that there were sort of ongoing security concerns throughout this throughout this period. Um and they've been very emphatic that the that the the that the gift and his decision to stand uh are unrelated.

um but I think it still uh raises a lot of questions about maybe the limits on on the declaration systems um that we have. You know, it um the the big question is, you know, uh now it's been referred to um sorry to use jargon, but the um the the the parliamentary uh watchdog for standards, shall we say, um, you know, it's been referred to them by the Conservative Party to say, you know, should of this should this have been declared as a donation?

or even as a gift, because there are some rules governing um MPs that even when someone gives them money, if there's any reason to believe that it might be used in any way for political purposes then it ought to be declared. So there isn't a question now as to whether or not what will happen with that referral and whether or not a judgment will be made that perhaps it ought to have been declared.

separate uh reporting that your newspaper The Guardian has has has been doing about Christopher Harborn and about his relationship with Farage and uh the Reform Party. But you get this story. You approach them, obviously as any good journalist does. For comment and, you know, to get their side of the story and so on. And and what happened? How did how did they respond to it?

Oh actually you um contacted the wrong person. Um you should have um contacted someone else and then we got a response from their lawyers asking for more time. So we gave them an additional twenty four hours and then they made a decision that they would give an interview to a different newspaper to try and get ahead of the story.

Um so so so that was their approach and um in t that was that was Reform UK's approach and we did contact lawyers acting for Christopher Harborn, um, having been in touch with some of his businesses. Um and they asked for more time, we also granted them that and then he made also made a decision um to to give an interview to a different paper. So they actually didn't respond to um what we call either your invitation to comment or your right of reply in journo jargon.

But that context that someone might be able to offer you can be absolutely critical. So it's a really important part of a reasonable, good, fair journalistic practice to do that. Um but it's it's tricky if people choose not to engage.

Likewise now we discover, thanks to your reporting, about this personal gift that has been given to Farage. Now Farage and Harborn, as you say, have absolutely denied that there is any connection. whatsoever to the donation. But it is true, isn't it, to say, that reform do have now, I think it's fair to say, the most crypto friendly policies of any of the UK parties, which is, as you said, just so happens to be, Christopher Harborn's business.

Um they um it it it should be noted that Christopher Harborn isn't their only donor that's got interest in cryptocurrency or the only way that they've expressed their interest in cryptocurrency. Nigel Farage has lent his face to um a campaign um to encourage people to invest in cryptocurrency that also involves the former chancellor Kwasi Kuateng

Um and um uh Ben Dalo um uh is uh another donor who has interest in cryptocurrencies. Um but um you know I'm not necessarily um suggesting certainly wouldn't be suggesting as a reporter that that that the sort of only reason that they might have interest in cryptocurrencies is because their donors have them. But I do think it's important that the public can see all of the information about um the financial interest

at play with any political party here. And that includes Reform UK. Because let's remember Nigel Farage has said that he thinks he's got a good shot of being the next Prime Minister of this country. And so I think it's really important to understand yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r yw'r

to Nigel Farage. I suppose some people might wonder, we talk about and often pride ourselves in British politics that we're not like American politics, that we limit the influence of of big money and big spending and big donors. It doesn't feel like that in this case, and perhaps it averts to the idea that I think some people might be surprised that there aren't tighter limits on what individuals can give to political parties.

Um but I think what is m what is more unusual is is consist such consistently large sums. So you you might have seen the sort of level of of of donation cumulatively from a single individual over a period of years. um that would be similar to the level that you have seen with Christopher Harborn. Um but it is it is a it is clearly as as it's a record.

um it's clearly very unusual to have quite so much money coming from uh one individual. But yes, there are there are there is, as I understand it, no no limit to what an individual may give to a political party beyond the overall

to go on the record and give this interview to the the telegraph prompted by our story is that he said he's really clear that he will find a way to continue to give more um and he also doesn't want any limits placed on people giving money when they're overseas.

So, um, as we know, um the the Prime Minister has talked about um uh trying to limit the amount of donations that comes for people who aren't living in the UK. Um and um Christopher Harbor said, um he he feels that he was the target of um Sakir's proposed legislation um banning foreign based citizens from donating to political parties and that he intends to um

He says w what to directly quote some he says where there's a will, there's a way. So he's certainly very clear that um He views it as a moral duty to support reform and to back them as much as possible. um um and to you know to find a way even if y you know it's it's not clear what ways he's he's quite identifying, but he's going to find find a way to make sure that he can continue to give very significant support financially to the party going.

before that Nigel Farage has carried a high risk, which we've we've talked about. How does that relate to what the House of Commons conduct rules of conduct say and actually what the rules are?

understand um that it's it's not sort of you don't sort of start day one as an MP and then going forward that's the only information that matters. It it doesn't work quite like that. The twelve month period before you become an MP matters too.

Um they're meant to focus on things that could um politically influence you, so they're meant to be about sort of party political activity or other political activity. So it is correct to state that um some if if a gift is entirely personal um then it can be treated as um then it can be treated as private and you don't need to declare it.

But the the way the rules are written is it is it does say that that, you know, that can be quite a complicated um that can be quite a complicated decision for for an MP to make. So it's also about sort of the perception it's suggesting in the rules. It's saying, you know i you have to be really clear that there could be no suggestion associated with it that that it might be more than just a gift.

Um, so uh that's that's that's very important. It's uh I I'm just gonna read from it a bit. I know it's a bit tedious, but it's really important this wording. Um both the possible motive of the giver and the use to which the gift is to be put should be considered. If there is any doubt, the gift should be registered. So that's the bar we're talking about now in the context of this five million gift, because we know that the Conservative Party has referred it.

to um the parliamentary watchdog. So I think it will be really interesting to see whether or not that meets that bar of it being a a a private, purely personal gift. um that um Swell Bravman has um has mentioned.

And yet again we see that in terms of its biggest donor, its biggest backer, possibly the most one the most important donor he might prove to be in British political history, we've got a tie base. incredibly wealthy man who makes his money in crypto, or at least some of his money in crypto, an industry about which the vast majority of the public has has has no idea.

and which is regulated in a rather shadowy way across the the world. Does remind us, doesn't it, that Nigel Farage is a complicated figure in terms of his politics and the sort of people who backs his party.

I I think um Nigel Farage has ha is clearly often been uh someone that cuts through to the communities you describe. Um I do wonder, you know, whether or not the the n the sort of the news and detail day by day is is something that that will also cut through to those communities.

Me Lewis Goodall will be back on Tuesday. So we'll see you next Tuesday, I suppose.