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
Big new report out on the immigration system from @CPSThinkTank, by @RobertJenrick, @NeilDotObrien & @MalvernianKarl. There’s a huge amount of really interesting stuff in there – so let me run through the key points/charts. (1/?) cps.org.uk/research/takin…
The first and most obvious point is that there has been a HUGE (and historically unprecedented) rise in net migration. In the 25 years before Tony Blair took office, cumulative migration was almost 100x lower than in the 25 years after.
Over the last few years in particular, the numbers have gone into overdrive - driven by a massive surge in non-EU migration.
Is Britain ready for the Baby Bust? My column this week is on, quite literally, the biggest story in the world - what's happening to population. Quick thread as some of the stats are pretty jaw-dropping (1/?) thetimes.co.uk/article/were-d…
A big new study in the Lancet confirms what demographers have known for ages - we're heading for a shrinking planet. By 2100, fertility rates in 97% of countries will be below replacement rates healthdata.org/news-events/ne…
But the fall isn't even! At the moment, Africa, India and China all have approx 1.4 billion people. By 2100, India is expected to be at 1.5 billion. China will almost halve, to 800 million. But Africa may be at 4.2 billion.
Yes, it's another prominent article in the Guardian pretending that we don't need to build any more houses. And like all the others, it's riddled with glaring errors. Just in case anyone believes this bullshit, let's do the thread thing. (1/far too many) theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2…
Central thesis of this article: there is no shortage of housing. It's all about landlords. Literally 'mass-scale housebuilding isn't necessary'. Punch! But, er, wrong.
Right, let's kick off. (Not screenshotting every par as this bloody thing is 1800 words long.) Two claims - the familiar one that we have more households than homes, so can't possibly have a crisis, and a new one that London is the same size, so how can prices rise?
I've written before about @SadiqKhan's thoroughly awful record on housing, and his relentless attempts to gaslight London into believing the opposite, but surely even his most loyal cronies can't defend the latest figures, published today. (1/?)
Target for GLA affordable housing starts, 2021-6: 23,900 to 27,100 p.a.
Actual GLA affordable housing starts, first three quarters of 2023-4: 874
Council house starts the Mayor boasted about in May: 23,000
Council house starts under the 'Building Council Homes for Londoners' programme since May: zero. (Yes, zero.)
The new population projections are out. And they show (shock!) that we either need to cut net migration, or build WAY more houses. Preferably, both. Quick thread (1/)
As @CPSThinkTank has pointed out repeatedly, the 300k a year housing target is based on a decade-old estimate that net migration would be 170,500 a year. The levels we've had have been... not that.
@CPSThinkTank The most recent assumption was that net migration would, despite current sky-high peaks, fall back to 245k in the long run. Many of us were not convinced - not least since the original estimate behind that was already invalidated by visa data at the point of publication!
Everyone is talking about Horizon/Fujitsu. But there are some key aspects everyone has missed - including the big reason Fujitsu kept getting contracts even after the scandal broke. Have done a deep dive for my column - thread below (1/?) thetimes.co.uk/article/the-vi…
The story starts in the 60s, when the Wilson govt hits on a new solution to Britain's lack of competitiveness - not nationalisation, but national direction. It forces private firms to merge (at gunpoint) to create 'national champions' which can export to the world.
One of these is British Leyland. Another - Tony Benn's brainchild - is International Computers Limited, or ICL. This is meant to be Britain's answer to IBM. Spoiler warning: it isn't.