Nathan Gill’s actions were “treasonous” but people should not “besmirch everyone else at Reform”, the party’s head of policy Zia Yusuf has said.

Gill, the former leader of Reform UK in Wales, was jailed for 10 and a half years last week after he admitted accepting tens of thousands of pounds in cash to make pro-Russian statements to the media and European Parliament.

Asked by Sky News’s Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips if the case showed the party was soft on President Vladimir Putin, Mr Yusuf said that would be an “incredibly unreasonable position to take”.

He said: “Nathan Gill, what he did was treasonous, it was horrific, it was awful. He’s been dealt with by the authorities and he deserves the sentence that he got.”

He added: “As far as we’re concerned he is ancient history. I’ve never met him, I had never heard about him until I saw he was in the newspapers. It is unreasonable to besmirch Reform and the millions of people around the country who support Nigel and support our party.”

Gill, 52, was announced as the leader of Reform UK in Wales in March 2021, but quit the party a few months later after he failed to be elected to the Senedd.

He previously led the Welsh wing of UKIP (UK Independence Party) between 2014 and 2016, then ran by Nigel Farage, and was a member of the Senedd between 2016 and 2017, as well as an MEP between 2014 and 2020.

Gill left UKIP in 2019 to join Mr Farage’s new Brexit Party – later rebranded as Reform UK.

Following an investigation by counter-terrorism police, officers said they believe Gill likely took a minimum of £40,000 in cash.

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer demanded an investigation into links between Reform UK and Russia following the case.

Mr Farage’s position on Russia has come under scrutiny in the past. He faced a backlash during the general election campaign when he spoke about the incursion of NATO and how “we provoked this war” in Ukraine.

Read more:
Starmer demands investigation into Reform-Russia links

Speaking to Trevor Phillips, Mr Yusuf insisted his boss has never supported or been sympathetic to Russia’s decision to invade Ukraine, saying it is “not Nigel’s position that ‘we provoked the war’.”

He said: “When he [Farage] was pressed as to how he would respond if he was prime minister and Russian jets encroached into NATO airspace, his view was that those planes should be shot down. We are crystal clear about our position.

“I would also say this: the notion that Vladimir Putin, the murderous dictator, is making decisions based on what Nigel Farage is saying here in England, I think is for the birds.

“We are now in a situation where Ukraine’s sovereignty has been violated, and Vladimir Putin needs to be brought to heel.”

But Labour accused Reform of “pandering to Moscow” following the interview.

Anna Turley, chair of the Labour Party, said Mr Farage has previously called Mr Putin “the leader he most admired and has repeatedly parroted Kremlin talking points”.

She added: “Reform must urgently allow an independent investigation to root out pro-Russia links, to assure the public that Putin holds no sway over their party or its representatives.”

Read more from Sky News:
Reeves vows to ‘grip the cost of living’
PM ‘playing whack-a-mole’ to keep US on side

Police have confirmed Mr Farage has not been part of the investigation into Gill.

Mr Farage said on Friday: “An investigation into Russian and Chinese influence over British politics would be welcome.”

The Reform UK MP for Clacton had previously described his former colleague as a “bad apple” and said he was “shocked” after Gill pleaded guilty to bribery.

He said: “Any political party can find in their midst all sorts of terrible people.

“You can never, ever guarantee 100% that everyone you meet in your life, you shake hands with in the pub, is a good person.”

It feels like the most torturous build-up to any budget in recent history.

After a slow and painful climb up the mountain of manifesto-busting income tax increases, a hasty and inglorious retreat.

There’s been endless speculation about the two-child benefit cap, tax thresholds, mansion taxes, exit taxes, energy bills, and pension schemes. Now, finally, we’re just days away.

Politics Live: Reeves’s ‘mansplaining’ claims are just a ‘smokescreen’, says shadow chancellor

Chancellor Rachel Reeves has set out her final stall in an opinion piece for The Sunday Times, in a bid to reclaim the iron mantle of fiscal discipline which has become somewhat skew-whiff amid the confusion.

She argues that increasing public debt is not a Labour virtue and insists her focus on Wednesday will be to grip inflation and address the cost of living – citing plans to freeze rail fares as an example of dealing with both.

But perhaps most interesting is her claim that controlling public spending “will require us to reform our welfare system too.” The government’s previous efforts to reform welfare and save £5bn ended in an inglorious failure.

Another bloody battle looms

Now with a new secretary of state in charge of the Department of Work and Pensions, government fixer Pat MacFadden, Ms Reeves is clearly signalling that she wants to try again.

While not exactly a surprise, it sets the stage for another bloody battle with the party’s increasingly rebellious backbenchers.

Perhaps scrapping the hated two-child benefit cap will be the quid pro quo offered to show she’s listening to left-wing concerns.

Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander, who had the unenviable job of avoiding questions about the budget on the Sunday morning broadcast round, was careful to frame the idea of increasing government spending on child poverty within the context of welfare reform.

Heavy hint two-child benefit cap to be axed

While she technically refused to be drawn on reports the chancellor is set to scrap the cap, she heavily hinted that was to be the case.

“Tackling child poverty is in the DNA of the Labour Party. Nobody wants to see kids going without,” she told Sky News’ Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips.

“And we know that three-quarters of children who are living in poverty at the moment are in working households and growing up in poverty has consequences that last a lifetime.”

It would be odd to make such a passionate pitch for the party’s anti-poverty credentials if the government is about to reject a policy which charities say would be the single most cost-effective measure to reduce child poverty.

How much would axing the cap cost?

Scrapping the cap is estimated to cost between £3bn and £4bn.

When challenged by Trevor Phillips on the fact that polling shows the majority of voters believe the two-child benefit cap is morally right, she responded “and that is why we are all so determined to make sure that our welfare system is fair” – before going on to outline the work Mr McFadden is doing to encourage people into employment rather than a life on benefits.

The Tories don’t believe the Labour Party has any hope of getting welfare cuts past its rebellious backbenchers.

“I want to see the chancellor stand up and explain how she is going to control public spending, particularly welfare,” said shadow chancellor Sir Mel Stride.

“In order to make sure that we’re not having to put up taxes, and she’s not going to be breaking all these promises that she’s made, yet again.”

Read more from Sky News:
PM ‘playing whack-a-mole’ to keep US on side
Jailed ex-Reform leader in Wales ‘can’t besmirch everyone else’

Autumn of disastrous headlines

After an autumn of disastrous headlines from the accidental release of foreign prisoners and Angela Rayner’s stamp duty to Peter Mandelson’s links to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, the authority of both the prime minister and the chancellor is much shakier now than it was even after the previous welfare rebellion.

A review into Personal Independence Payments launched as part of the fallout to those efforts is unlikely to recommend cuts.

Getting a greater share of the 6.5 million people currently reliant on benefits into the workplace has long been the holy grail for chancellors looking to boost economic growth – and scale back a spiralling health-related benefits bill which looks set to top £100bn by the end of the decade.

But multiple governments have failed to get a handle on the issue.

It seems unlikely at this moment of such fractious internal party relations that Rachel Reeves can really rely on the prospect of any serious welfare savings to help balance the books.

But she’s keen to highlight to both voters and the bond markets that she wants to try.

Keir Starmer flies out of South Africa this evening with two massive issues on his agenda – a potentially manifesto-busting budget and, as it stands, an unacceptable Ukrainian peace deal.

As he prepared to depart for London, the prime minister confirmed he was dispatching national security adviser Jonathan Powell to Geneva for talks with US officials, other European security advisers and Ukrainian representatives – as Europe and Ukraine scramble to reinsert themselves into a plan drawn up between Washington and Moscow.

The prime minister said on Saturday there was “more to do on the plan” in the coming days and the focus now was to try to make progress in Geneva.

Follow the latest: European leaders raise concerns over plan for Ukraine

After speaking on the phone to Donald Trump, Downing Street said the pair agreed their teams would work together on the US leader’s proposal in the Swiss city on Sunday.

Starmer also reiterated Britain’s “steadfast support for Ukraine” in a call with President Zelenskyy – as allies try to swing this deal more in Ukraine‘s favour, with the UK and other international leaders clear on their concerns to limit the size of the Ukrainian army and give up territory to Russia.

But in his remarks on camera, the prime minister was at pains to neither criticise the current deal nor President Trump.

One figure told me that the PM wants to act as a bridge between the Europeans and the US and has been playing a “game of whack-a-mole” over the past couple of days in an effort to keep others from publicly saying the deal is unacceptable for fear it would only serve to irritate President Trump and hurt Ukraine.

Earlier, the prime minister said he would talk to his US counterpart in the coming days.

“I’m absolutely clear in my mind that President Trump wants a just and lasting peace, not just from the actions he’s taken towards that end, but also from the private discussions that I’ve had with him,” Mr Starmer said.

“So I know what he’s trying to achieve. We all want to achieve that.”

But there will be a question about what the alternative options are if allies cannot improve this deal by President Trump’s Thursday deadline.

The first option is to try to improve it and also slow down the process and buy more time, but if that fails, are allies looking at scenarios where they try to shore up Ukraine’s war efforts without the US support?

The prime minister responded by talking about point five in the 28-point plan, in which Ukraine is offered security guarantees from the US.

Read more:
Trump’s 28-point Ukraine peace plan in full
Analysis: We could all pay if Europe doesn’t step up
Starmer addresses G20 summit – but Trump boycotts talks

“That fortifies in me the belief that what we’re all trying to achieve here is a just and lasting peace will only be just as lasting if there are security guarantees,” Mr Starmer said.

“And if we bear in mind that matters for Ukraine are always to be determined by Ukraine.”

The next 24 hours will be critical as the Europeans, Ukraine and other allies try to improve this deal.