“🚀 Don’t let the future pass you by! Join Reform UK and be part of the change we need. Together

British workers are being told yet again that “tough decisions” mean higher taxes, squeezed wages and poorer services. At the same time, billions of pounds are flowing out in welfare, foreign aid and public spending that do not put British citizens first. For Reform UK supporters, this raises a simple question: why should you pay more when so much of your money is being wasted?

This post walks through Nigel Farage and Zia Yusuf’s alternative to Labour’s coming budget, a detailed package of £25 billion in savings and extra income this year, almost all of it focused on foreign nationals, not British taxpayers. It explains the five main proposals, sets out the numbers, and looks at the bigger argument about work, migration and fairness.

A Budget That Punishes Aspiration

Nigel opened with a blunt warning about Labour’s plans, calling them an attack on aspiration and on what he calls “alarm clock Britain”, the people who get up early, work hard and try to get on.

He argued that the budget will:

• “do nothing for the 5.6 million very brave men and women who act as sole traders”
• ignore the small business owners and self‑employed who keep the economy moving
• make life easier for those who choose not to work while punishing those who do

He pointed to last year’s changes as an example. The minimum wage for young people went up, but the threshold at which employers start paying national insurance was cut to £5,000. The result, he said, is 50,000 fewer under‑18s in work than a year ago. For him, this is not just an economic problem, it is a cultural one, because young people are losing that early link between work and reward.

On top of this, he warned that bond markets are already nervous. After what happened to Liz Truss, everyone knows that if markets lose confidence, they can force a government to change course in days.

If you want more context on how this fits into Reform UK’s wider tax and spending stance, it sits alongside the broader Reform UK policy summary and joining information.

A Chancellor Out Of Her Depth

Nigel did not hide his view of the current chancellor. He said Rachel Reeves is “hopelessly out of her depth”, to a level he finds embarrassing. Lee Anderson’s nickname “Rachel from accounts” has stuck, partly because, in their view, this is a Treasury run by people who have never built a business or held what most people would call a proper job.

His wider charge is that the budget is being shaped by left‑wing think tanks and career politicians, not by people who understand risk, payroll, or trying to keep a small firm afloat.

Reform UK Setting The Pace On Migration

Nigel argued that Reform UK is driving much of the debate on migration. He said the home secretary’s recent speech on illegal migration sounded as if it had been drafted in response to Reform’s pressure in the Red Wall.

On illegal migration, he agreed with her description of small boats and law‑breaking as “tearing the country apart”. But he stressed that economic damage is mainly coming from mass legal migration, not the Channel crossings.

For two decades, he said, there has been a clear link between falling productivity and the large scale import of low skilled labour. At the same time, benefit bills linked to both legal and illegal migrants have risen sharply. Zia Yusuf, Reform UK’s head of policy, then set out detailed proposals on how to change course. You can see more of that thinking in their piece on Reform UK’s stance on mass legal migration.

Zia Yusuf’s £25 Billion Alternative Budget

Zia began with a simple principle. If “tough decisions” have to be made, the first group to bear that weight should be foreign nationals, not British citizens. On that basis, he laid out five changes that he said Rachel Reeves could write into her budget immediately.

These are the five headline measures and what they raise or save this year:

1. End universal credit for foreign nationals
   No more universal credit for non‑UK citizens, with a three‑month notice period. Saving this year: £6 billion (from an £8 billion annual bill).
2. Cap foreign aid at £1 billion
   A hard limit, while keeping support for Ukraine and key multilateral commitments. Saving this year: £10 billion.
3. Raise the Immigration Health Surcharge to the real NHS cost
   Increase the charge so migrants pay the full average cost of their NHS use. Revenue this year: £5 billion, based on official net migration forecasts.
4. Deport foreign prisoners
   Remove over 10,000 foreign offenders from UK prisons and send them back to their home countries. Net saving this year: £0.5 billion after deportation costs.
5. Reform PIP for non‑serious anxiety
   Move people with mild conditions off long term PIP and onto back to work programmes. Saving this year: £0.5 billion, rising to £9 billion a year by 2029.

Together, these add up to over £25 billion in one fiscal year. Zia stressed that these figures are calculated before the so‑called “Boris wave” of Hong Kong migrants becomes eligible for benefits and permanent status, which will push pressures even higher.

For a more detailed breakdown of these measures, the Durham team has also summarised them in a piece on five budget changes to prevent tax hikes.

Welfare: UK Benefits For UK Citizens

Reform UK’s starting point is simple: UK welfare should be for UK citizens.

Zia highlighted that foreign nationals are the fastest growing part of the welfare bill wherever data is available. In universal credit, where ministers publish some figures, the number of foreign claimants has risen from about 950,000 to 1.3 million in just three and a half years. That is 350,000 extra foreign nationals on universal credit in a very short time.

He also pointed out that both Conservative and Labour governments hide most of the data on welfare by nationality. They conceal line items and NHS usage figures that would show the true demand from foreign nationals. Reform UK says it would publish the lot, so taxpayers can see where their money is going.

Foreign Aid: Charity Must Start At Home

Zia argued that current levels of foreign aid are impossible to justify when British public services are struggling.

He gave a striking example. Educational results show that 15‑year‑olds in Wales are doing worse than 15‑year‑olds in Turkey, and below the OECD average. Yet British taxpayers have been forced to send hundreds of millions in aid to Turkey, a country where pupils are outperforming our own in some areas.

He also highlighted that, while Labour governments resisted a statutory inquiry into grooming gangs at home, they wired £19 million to Pakistan for child exploitation prevention schemes overseas. That is going to make British people’s blood boil, he said.

Reform UK’s plan is a hard cap of £1 billion for foreign aid. Within that, they would still keep funding for Ukraine and maintain membership of bodies like the UN and IMF. The rest of the current aid budget, about £10 billion a year, would be saved.

Immigration Health Surcharge: Stop The 62% Discount

One of the most eye‑catching points came from the government’s own impact assessment on the Immigration Health Surcharge.

That document states that the current £1,000 a year fee represents only 38% of the average per person cost of the NHS, which is put at over £2,700 a year. In other words, foreign nationals are getting a 62% discount on NHS use. The same assessment admits the government does not have a full handle on the true cost of migrant demand on the health service.

Zia gave one clear example. The birth rate for foreign nationals is about 30% higher than for British citizens, and each birth costs the NHS around £55,000 by the time intensive maternity and follow‑up care are included. That heavy demand helps explain why maternity wards, GPs and other services are so stretched. You can see that tension explored further in their piece on the impact of foreign births on NHS costs.

Since 2010, the population has risen by about 10%, with over 90% of that increase driven by immigration. In the same period, real NHS spending has almost doubled, yet the country actually has fewer beds. Once a system hits capacity, every extra person adds more than a simple share of cost. That, they argue, is what has “brought the NHS to its knees”.

Reform UK’s answer is to raise the surcharge to match the real average cost, scrap most exemptions for migrants, and cut net migration to zero. Even with zero net migration, they calculate that a higher charge would still raise over £3 billion a year. On current net migration forecasts, the figure is £5 billion.

Foreign Prisoners And PIP Reform

Reform UK is also targeting what it sees as unfair spending on foreign offenders.

There are more than 10,000 foreign nationals in UK prisons. Some of these are from countries that receive large sums in aid from Britain. Pakistan was one example given. Despite hundreds of millions in aid, British leaders have failed to secure agreements for Pakistan to take back its convicted criminals.

By deporting foreign prisoners and cutting the prison population by that number, they estimate the UK could save around £0.5 billion a year, even after paying for flights, processing and support.

On disability benefits, Zia and Lee Anderson have already set out plans to overhaul Personal Independence Payment (PIP). The idea is to stop long term payments for people with what they describe as non‑serious anxiety and similar conditions, and to move them onto proper back to work schemes.

They argue that European research shows getting people, especially young adults, into work is better for their health and wellbeing than leaving them “on the scrap heap” for years. The savings are expected to be £3.5 billion this year, rising to £9 billion per year by 2029 as reforms bed in and claimant numbers fall.

Labour’s Choice: Tax Rises Or Put Britain First

Nigel summed up the message like this: putting up taxes in this budget is a choice, not something forced on Labour.

Reform UK’s package of changes would raise or save more than £25 billion this year, and those numbers grow each year as welfare and aid trends compound. If Rachel Reeves refuses to adopt them and instead chooses to raise national insurance, tighten inheritance tax or bring in sugar and “milkshake” taxes, that is, in their view, a political decision to keep prioritising foreign nationals over British people.

Zia was blunt. He called that decision “treachery” and said British taxpayers are “sick and tired of it”.

Key Points From The Q&A

The press conference finished with questions from the media, which helped clarify several points.

On EU citizens and universal credit, Zia accepted that the withdrawal agreement protects some rights, but argued that facts on the ground have changed. In 2015, there were roughly four times as many EU nationals claiming benefits in the UK as there were Brits claiming in the EU. Since then, numbers in the UK have exploded. Reform UK would seek a renegotiation, and if Brussels refused, they would be ready to act unilaterally and face down any retaliation.

On small boats and asylum, Nigel said the home secretary’s new plan was strong on language but weak in practice. Courts and the European Convention on Human Rights would still block tough measures. He called ideas like taking jewellery and watches from arrivals “performative” and pointed out that even Denmark, which inspired the policy, has only confiscated valuables from about 17 people.

On tax, both Nigel and Zia repeated that Reform UK wants lower taxes, but only once debt is under control. They warned that by the time of the next general election, Labour could have imposed £60–100 billion in extra tax every year. Their £25 billion package is designed to stop that spiral before it begins.

On council tax and local government, Nigel reminded reporters that Reform UK’s new councils have inherited huge debts and SEND costs. He said he never promised to cut or freeze council tax, only to find savings and aim to keep rises to inflation if possible.

On racism and immigration, Zia said he has full sympathy for any politician facing racial abuse, including being called an “effing P‑word”. But he rejected the idea that concern about immigration is racist. Voters, he said, simply want borders, law and public services that work for those who pay in.

Conclusion: A Clear Choice For Reform UK Supporters

The picture painted here is stark. Either Britain carries on with higher taxes, rising debt and open‑ended spending on foreign nationals, or it takes a different path and asks others to tighten their belts before British workers do. Reform UK’s £25 billion plan is meant to show that another way is possible.

For supporters in places like Durham and across the country, the choice is whether to accept another “tough decisions” budget, or to get organised, speak up and help build a movement that puts British citizens first. If you want a fuller view of how these ideas fit into the wider platform, the Durham team has a clear guide to joining Reform UK and its immigration policies.

The coming months will decide whether Labour’s budget goes through unchallenged, or whether Reform UK and its supporters can turn this alternative into real pressure for change.