Steve Akehurst Profile picture
Nov 16, 2022 14 tweets 7 min read Read on X
How do views of UK MPs on climate change compare to the public? In short, there's a few alarming gaps.

A quick thread on new polling with @ECIU_UK, plus a few thoughts (some hope and some despair!) #ukclimate #cop27egypt 👇🧵
Methodology: two polls via @YouGov in October 2022:

- one poll of 103 MPs, weighted to be representative of party, region, length of service etc

- one poll of 1,800 UK adults

MP surveys are never perfect methodologically, but YouGov do a really good job of them.
Firstly, the good news is there's broad agreement between MPs of all parties and voters on the problem of climate change and support for Net Zero.

They all want to see UK global leadership - one for the UK team at #COP27! ImageImageImage
On issue salience, climate is voters' third biggest issue.

MPs aren't far off this. But immigration (for Cons), housing and crime (for Lab MPs) punching above its weight wrongly pushes it down the ranking of what MPs think voters prioritise. ImageImage
Con MPs view the threat of climate change as less proximate, but do still see it as a threat to the world and future generations.

(NB i can't break out SNP or Lib Dem MPs because the sub-samples are too small, pls don't shout at me) Image
Where worrying gaps start to open up is on energy sources, especially onshore wind.

Offshore, hydro and nuclear enjoy net support among MPs of both main parties and the public.

But Con MPs are net negative to onshore wind (-2%), while the public are +61%. Why? Image
Well, in part because Con MPs quite significantly misjudge even their own party voters' attitudes to onshore wind.

Con MPs estimate Con '19 voters to have a net favourability of -41% towards onshore wind.

It's actually +50%! Image
This makes 64% of Conservative MPs feel that a majority of their constituents would oppose a new local onshore wind project.

But we know this isn't true! It's supported by massive majorities.

As we've seen, this misperception leads to harmful policy outcomes. ImageImage
It also likely bleeds into the gap between some Con MPs and the public when you force a choice on the energy security debate.

(btw the lead the 'green' argument has v.s the fossil fuel case has grown month-on-month this year, with voters of all parties) Image
TL;DR on this + other myths eg 'Red Wall voters don't care about climate': the problem's not voter attitudes to climate action. There's been big shifts. Idk what else we can reasonably ask of the public.

The problem is elite perceptions of voter attitudes haven't caught up.
Clearly some MPs *are* out of touch.

But it's not worth being partisan about it. There's many excellent Con MPs on climate & @CEN_HQ do a superb job.

A lot of this is growing structural problem with *who* MPs hear from most. I wrote about it here fwiw strongmessagehere.substack.com/p/the-engageme…
Ultimately as campaigners we have to shift this dynamic. I love polling obviously but it only goes so far.

An idea its worth funders looking at on renewables: infrastructure to mobilise those in favour of onshore wind, to at least even-out the mailbags of MPs/Cllrs.
Very lastly, just as an aside, it was good to have my suspicions confirmed on the messaging divide.

Co-benefit climate messages do best with elites, while broader themes do best with voters.

(Respondents saw a sentence or two on each message. Higher score = more convincing) Image
Anyway, many thanks to @politico for covering the wind angle of this today, and @AnushkaAsthana for mentioning it briefly in her onshore package for ITV too.

YouGov will publish the tables but if anyone wants them before then do DM me.

politico.eu/newsletter/lon…

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Steve Akehurst

Steve Akehurst Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @SteveAkehurst

Jul 28
Neglected fact: getting more housebuilding is about more than planning reform.

Here’s an important graph for understanding that:

Developers have consistently under-delivered on their planning permissions for years.

🧵 on why and why it matters Image
As mentioned, this phenomenon - builders with consents not building - is not new, it’s been the case for ages.

Flummoxed by it, in 2018 the Conservative government commissioned Oliver Letwin to figure out what was going on.

What he found was startling.
assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5b2d1ab2…
Image
Letwin found on large sites, developers were *intentionally building out slowly in order to keep the price of housing high in that area*.

This is what’s meant by ‘the absorption rate’, an industry euphemism.

The largest sites can take 15 years (15!) to complete for this reason
Image
Image
Read 12 tweets
May 27
A thread of some random polling bits and bobs which tell us a few interesting things about voters in this election campaign.

All from a survey I ran recently with @OpiniumResearch, - leaving here mostly for posterity! 🧵 #GE2024
On tax cuts vs public services, even when you spell out what tax cuts mean for people and make them *big*, ppl still prefer spend it on public services.

(Suggests to me Lab had more space to run on 'investment vs spending cuts', but that's a bigger argument !) Image
Where are key voters going to be learning about the campaign, at least if we believe what they say when asked?

Television, mostly.

It blows everything else out the water with older groups especially. Image
Read 11 tweets
Sep 21, 2023
As someone who obsesses over public attitudes to climate/Net Zero as a day job, fwiw a quick thread summarising my take on the electoral politics of Sunak's announcements yesterday. 🧵
Swing voters hold 2 things in their heads concurrently:

1. They have some sympathy (albeit variable/soft) for *some* of govt’s individual policy positions yesterday.

2. They're strongly pro-NZ/environment and don't like anti-green politicians. This is too often under-estimated
How Sunak's positioning plays is determined by which wins out. You can see from his speech he understands the balance.

The problem is the way this gets excitedly pitch rolled as a 'culture war' or anti-green generally. That's also the more interesting angle for media - see BBC Image
Read 6 tweets
Aug 1, 2023
Some new polling to try and get at this "voters support Net Zero but won’t pay for it" zombie take running wild in recent days.

via @focaldataHQ

(apologies for yet another thread on this but it's been annoying me and, more importantly, is now actively shaping Govt policy!) 🧵
Firstly some new numbers to back up an old point: people's willingness to pay for Net Zero is no worse than most other major policy areas. (actually for some its better, incl among swing voters)

It's only the NHS which clear majorities are actively willing to take a hit for.
Image
Image
Yet nobody walks around SW1 sagely stroking their chin, “ah yes people *say* they care about schools/crime but are they willing to pay for it?”

Because we've absorbed the idea NZ simply must = cost + inconvenience. But it needn't.

Get the policy + comms right = voters follow.
Read 10 tweets
Jul 22, 2023
An ongoing thread on the risk - to both parties - of reading way too much from Uxbridge/ULEZ into wider voter attitudes on the environment and climate change.

Posting it here not least for posterity. 🧵
Whatever your view of ULEZ, it’s always been far more contentious than other green policy. Here's it's the only one in negative territory nationally.

It’s joined btw by fracking + North Sea drilling - policies pushed by NZ sceptics. So no lectures from them on public opinion. Image
Also should be noted ULEZ is far more popular in Khan’s electorate (albeit depends bit how you ask Q, and intensity of antis usually > pros)

But politics makes more sense in LDN, and tbf it matters: it has already significantly reduced toxic air in LDN
standard.co.uk/news/london/sa…
Read 7 tweets
Jul 15, 2023
I really don’t agree with this.

It’s not the right combination of words lacking. Voters already get the threat of climate change.

IMO it’s the infrastructure with which to get that story heard by people consistently.

(yes sorry it’s a 🧵)

theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
In wankier terms, the issue is not sympathy but salience.

The extent to which people think climate a problem and want action is now consistently high (left).

The degree to which it’s a priority ebs and flows far more (right).
Image
Image
This is an issue because it’s salience which drives voting behaviour, civic action and what issues people change consumer behaviour in aid of.

It’s also salience which makes us more willing to bear cost/inconvenience in pursuit of a policy goal.
Image
Image
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(