Polls | Gaza | Fact Checker | Support Us
Sign In | Join Free |
UK FACT CHECK POLITICS
UK FACT CHECK POLITICS
 Voting intention Labour Lab 26% Reform Ref 21% Con Con 20% Green Grn 14% Lib Dem LD 10% Poll tracker

Menu

Topics
About
Get Involved
Follow Us

Account

Does anyone really believe Nigel Farage and Reform will protect working women?

lbc.co.uk 17 June 2026 at 20:46 View original article →

The original link is the material being checked. It may contain false or misleading claims — we link for transparency, not endorsement.

54/100
Verdict Low Trust Mixed (Partly Verified; substantial Unverified/Opinion)

This is an opinion piece making several factual assertions about Reform UK policy (replacing the Equality Act with a proposed “Women and Motherhood Protection Act”, effects on equal-pay claims), UK labour-law changes under a recent Employment Rights Act, and welfare policy (two-child limit).

✓ 5 checks out ✕ 0 disputed ? 9 unverified
☰ Full analysis The complete summary ⌄

This is an opinion piece making several factual assertions about Reform UK policy (replacing the Equality Act with a proposed “Women and Motherhood Protection Act”, effects on equal-pay claims), UK labour-law changes under a recent Employment Rights Act, and welfare policy (two-child limit). Targeted web research confirms the existence of Reform UK’s “Women and Motherhood Protection Act” proposal and that it is framed as superseding the Equality Act; it also supports the concern that equal-pay-for-work-of-equal-value claims could be put at risk. Separately, up-to-date official and quasi-official sources confirm major Employment Rights Act changes (including statutory sick pay eligibility changes from 6 April 2026 and measures restricting exploitative zero-hours practices), but some implementation timing/details in the article are overstated or not precisely evidenced. Claims about a specific by-election candidate’s past slurs and Farage’s alleged donor/“dark money” links are not confirmable from high-quality primary/secondary sources within this research pass and are therefore left Unverified. Overall, the piece is rhetorically charged, mixes verified facts with interpretation, and would benefit from tighter sourcing and clearer separation between confirmed policy text and predicted legal consequences.

What checked out (5)
  • Reform UK proposed introducing a “Women and Motherhood Protection Act”.
  • Reporting indicates Reform UK’s proposal is presented as superseding/replacing the Equality Act 2010.
  • Equal pay protections for “work of equal value” are a central feature of UK equal pay law, and commentators/union statements argue Reform’s proposal could put such claims at risk.
  • UK government sources and employment-law guidance describe a major package of workers’ rights reforms, including ending/restricting ‘exploitative’ zero-hours contracts (with a guaranteed-hours offer mechanism) and reforms to statutory sick pay eligibility; some changes take effect from 6 April 2026.
  • The two-child limit in Universal Credit was legislated to be removed with effect from 6 April 2026 (assessment periods starting that date), per UK government and parliamentary sources.
? Unverified claims 9 claims ⌄
  • Reform UK has “repeatedly pledged to roll back women’s rights” (broad characterisation; depends on definition and requires systematic evidence across multiple pledges).
  • The article’s description that Reform is intervening “in the final days of a prominent by-election” involving “a candidate with a history of derogatory slurs about women”, and that Nigel Farage dismissed the comments as “laddish pub talk” (specific event/quotation not verified from high-quality sources in this pass).
  • Reform UK has “made clear it wants to torch Britain’s established legal framework, the Equality Act” (generalised phrasing; while replacement/repeal is supported, the intent and scope of ‘torch’ is interpretive).
  • “Getting rid of [the Equality Act] will effectively legalise discrimination in this country.” (predictive/legal conclusion; would require detailed legal analysis and the exact replacement text).
  • “Reform’s promise to scrap the Employment Rights Act.” (a specific pledge is asserted; not confirmed here from Reform primary policy text).
  • The Employment Rights Act “will help keep women safe from harassment at work” and “has delivered sick pay for all” (partly supported in direction by reforms, but the exact phrasing ‘for all’ and the harassment mechanism require more precise legislative/official confirmation).
  • “Women’s organisations have called the ERA legislation a huge step forward.” (needs identifiable organisations/statements).
  • Reform pledged to “roll back the renters’ rights… no-fault eviction” and “reinstate the two-child benefit cap… plunge millions of kids into poverty” (parts may be true, but this pass did not verify Reform’s renters’ rights pledge and did not verify the ‘millions’ poverty impact claim; the two-child limit reinstatement claim is not verified to primary/2x reputable secondary standard here).
  • Farage “is cosying up to… crypto donors and dark money anti-abortion groups” supporting Trump, and that this connects to limiting reproductive rights (requires specific donor identities, documentation, and reputable investigation; not verified here).
⌕ Sources & how we checked Search journal, source grades, confidence ⌄
Confidence

Medium — Confidence is medium because multiple high-priority factual elements (existence of the proposed “Women and Motherhood Protection Act” as reported, and official legislative timelines for UC two-child limit removal and Employment Rights Act changes) are supported by up-to-date reputable sources, including UK government and parliamentary materials. However, several consequential claims and key context assertions (candidate slurs/Farage quote; donor/dark-money links; specific pledges to scrap named Acts; broad claims about legalising discrimination) were not confirmed to the required evidentiary standard in this pass, reducing overall certainty and lowering the trust score.

Search journal

LBC Opinion "Women and Motherhood Protection Act" Reform UK Kate Bell 17 Jun 2026

Reform UK "Women and Motherhood Protection Act"

Employment Rights Act 2026 UK ban exploitative zero-hours contracts sick pay for all harassment at work

two-child benefit cap to be lifted from April 2026 legislation

Glasgow City Council equal pay women back pay millions

Article metrics

Emotion 14% · Reading grade 10.5 · 740 words

≡ The article we checked Full text as retrieved ⌄
Reform’s so-called “Women and Motherhood Protection Act”would drag us back decades on gender equality, writes TUC Assistant General Secretary Kate Bell 17 Jun 2026, 13:21 | Updated: 7h ago Reform’s so-called “Women and Motherhood Protection Act”would drag us back decades on gender equality, writes TUC Assistant General Secretary Kate Bell. Picture: Alamy By Kate Bell I could barely contain my anger when Reform UK – a party that has repeatedly pledged to roll back women’s rights –claimed to stand up for women and families. Loading audio... My initial draft of this piece was one long series of angry face emojis. Because in reality,Reform’s so-called “Women and Motherhood Protection Act”would drag us back decades on gender equality. The timing of this intervention is telling. In the final days of a prominent by-election in which the party is standing a candidate with a history of derogatory slurs about women – comments which Nigel Farage dismissed as “[laddish pub talk]( - Reform is trying to distract us from their sexist policies and politicians. But behind the shameless electioneering is something much more sinister: this is a smokescreen for slashing women’s rights. So let’s talk about what Reform is actually proposing. The party is pledging to keep some of the protections from sex discrimination that women have relied on for half a century.Apparently, as women, we ought to be grateful for these crumbs. At the same time, they seem to be planning to ditch the longstanding principle of equal pay for work of equal value – a principle which has been around for years to ensure women get a fair day’s pay compared to their male colleagues.And this has very real consequences – for example, women working at Glasgow City Council secured millions in back pay after being denied a fair wage for years. Reform has also made clear it wants to torch Britain’s established legal framework, the Equality Act, which has protected women– and all working people – for a decade and a half. Yes, the Act protects women on the basis of sex. But it also protects all workers from other forms of discrimination which women often experience, like discrimination on the basis of pregnancy, religion, sexual orientation, age,race and disability.Getting rid of it will effectively legalise discrimination in this country. And then there is Reform’s promise to scrap the Employment Rights Act. The same Employment Rights Act(ERA)which will help keep women safe from harassment at work. That will ban exploitative zero-hours contracts, which make it harder for mums to balance childcare and work. And that has delivered sick pay for all, which disproportionately benefits low-paid women. It’s little wonder that women’s organisations have called the ERA legislation a huge step forward. I could go on and on about the gains for women from the Act – gains that Reform wants to unpick. But it’s not only on women’s rights at work that Reform is threatening. Whether it’s their pledge to roll back the renters’ rights, leaving families at the mercy of rogue landlords - facing the constant threat of no-fault eviction and unaffordable rent hikes. Or the promise to reinstate the two-child benefit cap, which would plunge millions of kids into poverty. This is a party that doesn’t care one jot about women and families. And it’s not only the policy announcements that are nauseating –it’s the rhetoric too. I’ve heard my fair share of patronising comments in my time. But against some stiff competition, Reform lecturing women about “protecting motherhood” might be up there with the worst of the lot. It shouldn’t need saying in 2026. But women are more than their ability to procreate – someone should tell Reform. Despite rhetoric which wouldn’t be out of place in The Handmaid’s Tale,it’s hardly surprising Reform is going down this path. As always, you should follow the money.Farage is cosying up to the same kind of crypto donors and dark money [anti-abortion groups]( are supporting Trump as he takes a sledgehammer to women’s rights - including by severely limiting access to reproductive rights. All women – whether mums or not – are at risk from a Reform government that wants to turn the clock back. The evidence is clear as day.Reform can’t be trusted on women’s rights. _\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\__ **_Kate Bell is Assistant General Secretary at the TUC._** **_LBC Opinion provides a platform for diverse opinions on current affairs and matters of public interest._** **_The views expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official LBC position._** **_To contact us email_**[**_opinion@lbc.co.uk_**](mailto:opinion@lbc.co.uk)

Share this fact check

← Check another article or image