We've just published a huge set of polling from @FrankLuntz on the new values and language of British politics. You can find the full thing here, but I thought I'd summarise the most arresting findings. (Warning: long, but worthwhile) cps.org.uk/media/press-re…
First things first: the public is really pissed off! Solid majority for 'fuck 'em all' to both business and political leaders
Likewise, when we asked them to pick the words that represented their feelings towards same, they were overwhelmingly negative
(Quick ops note: Frank's method is to give people a load of choices and ask them to pick their top two/three/four. Hence percentages adding to more than 100.)
Not to belabour the point, but when you ask people what politicians are in it for, this is the answer you get...
And likewise, these were their top picks when asked to describe British businesses.
As I wrote in my @thesundaytimes column, there's a huge challenge here for free market types like me - it's not just that people don't like business, but that messages and language around aspiration, competitiveness, entrepreneurship just don't resonate thetimes.co.uk/article/aspira…
So what do voters want instead? Well, here are their top picks.
They're worried about the NHS...
They're worried about crime and increasingly about cost of living - expect both to start hitting the headlines much more often...
And they're worried about the gap between rich and poor, especially Labour voters.
Politically, the big gap between Tory and Labour (which I want to write about more) is optimism vs pessimism. That may be down to who's in power, or it may be deeper-rooted. The gap in these three questions is fascinating in terms of, essentially, whether Britain is broken
There's lots in the survey about woke, cancel culture etc, but that's been covered elsewhere so I won't go into it here. But the age breakdown here is utterly fascinating, which goes hand in hand with the party breakdown above.
There is loads of utterly fascinating stuff in the survey (that link again here cps.org.uk/media/press-re…), but I'll finish on some personal highlights
This is from the business questions we asked, but applies more widely. Climate change isn't a partisan issue any more. Uniquely (says Frank), the right and the left are both concerned about it.
(Uniquely as in vs other countries.)
Climate is also the exception to the rule that, as Frank told the Sunday Telegraph, people mostly just want companies to shut up about CSR and purpose and focus on doing a better job for their workers and customers telegraph.co.uk/news/2021/07/0…
Other striking findings: always call yourself an employer, never a business, and delete 'corporation' from the dictionary.
Even Tory voters care about protecting the poorest and most vulnerable
Overwhelmingly, we all think we put in more than we get out...
...and that government is wasting the cash it already spends, either on the rich (Labour) or immigrants/scroungers (Tories). (Stunningly low figures for 'the poor', 'people like me', 'hardworking taxpayers' etc.)
I don't think it's in the slide deck, but it is also impossible to overstate how much Tory voters hate foreign aid spending. Sorry, Andrew Mitchell, but they're not with you on this.
Finally, a quick illustration of why the Tories are in a better position than Labour. Both the public and Tory voters prefer the party of today to Cameron's (though there is a lingering pash for Thatcher). But everyone still misses Mr Tony
And obviously please follow me, Frank and @CPSThinkTank for more insight, both from his survey work and our amazing team of researchers
PS For those asking why the language differs on the final slide between ‘hate’ and ‘strongly oppose’, it’s a typo. We changed it for both but didn’t update properly.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Starmer says Whitehall is filled with 'a cottage industry of checkers and blockers'. It’s too hard 'for the most enterprising people in country to just get on with the job'. So he's going to cut compliance costs for firms by 25%. Great! Just a few minor problems... (1/?)
In his speech, Starmer cited Alison, a brewer and publican, who has to spend hours filling in forms. But Alison is about to be hammered by NIC rises and minimum wage hikes!
Then there's the Employment Rights Bill, voted through the Commons on literally the same day as Starmer's speech, which will... raise compliance costs for business, by between £0.9bn & £4.5bn (though we'll come back to that).
Welfare reform is not just a fiscal necessity, but a moral one - because as I argue in @thetimes today we're not just paying people off, but writing them off. (1/?)
The govt is set to announce a rumoured £5bn in benefit cuts. It's already hugely controversial. Yet as I point out in my column today, it would cover just 1/16th of the predicted increase in the welfare bill. thetimes.com/comment/column…
Of course, a lot of that is pensions (hi, triple lock!). But the other big driver is ill health. Today, 9.3 million people of working age are economically inactive, and 6m on out of work benefits. Of those, 2.8 million are inactive due to illness - up from 2m before the pandemic.
Have written column today on the NHS - and the fact that @wesstreeting appears to be attempting the biggest shake-up since Lansley, even though no one's actually noticed. (1/?)
Ever since Lansley, the NHS has had two hands on the wheel - the Health Department and NHS England, the latter of which actually *runs* the NHS day-to-day. This... hasn't worked well.
The departure of Amanda Pritchard was reported as Streeting reasserting DHSC control. In fact, it's part of an attempt to make health more like schools - local control, local responsibility, with the centre driving accountability and transparency, not controlling with iron fist.
On Wednesday, the Climate Change Committee will publish a document far more important than any Budget or industrial strategy - because it will set the terms of trade for the British economy for years. (1/?)
The Seventh Carbon Budget gives the govt its official blueprint for how much carbon we can emit in 2038-42 - and where emissions need to be before then, and (crucially) what kind of things might need to be done to reach those targets.
These targets, once adopted, are legally binding. The govt can be, and has been, sued for not having an adequate plan. The problem is, they also require us to do some pretty dramatic things - which get more dramatic the further we are from hitting the targets.
The triple lock is a wasteful, unfair and outdated policy. So why the hysteria when politicians even gesture towards questioning it? Thread, with charts and data and stuff. (1/?)
As I say in my column today, the purpose of the triple lock - which sees the state pension rise by the highest of earnings, inflation or 2.5% - was to restore the value of the state pension, and tackle pensioner poverty. It’s succeeded.
Today, according to official statistics, pensioners are substantially less likely than those of working age to be in poverty after housing costs are taken into account.
Why did the Tories lose the election? Can they recover? If so, how? Today, @CPSThinkTank publishes a major piece of work by James Frayne, based on pre-election polling of 4,000 people plus immersive work and focus groups in key electoral battlegrounds. So what did we find? 🧵
The first and most obvious point: the Tories lost the election because people thought they were crap at running the country. In particular, they failed to deliver on the most important issues people cared about: cost of living, small boats, NHS waiting lists, GP appointments.
There was also a very strong sense – esp among working-class voters – that the party only cared about the rich (one reinforced by the mini-Budget). For middle-class voters, the core issue was competence rather than values, although their views were equally apocalyptic.