Labour may not agree with Blair, but the public does…
This month’s CityAM / Freshwater Strategy Poll reveals that the public is largely on the side of the former Prime Minister rather than Keir Starmer or his potential heirs when it comes to welfare, energy costs and growth, says Matthew Lesh
Love him or, like many others, absolutely detest his guts, it’s hard to avoid the fact that Tony Blair is an expert attention-getter. His 5,700-word essay last week will be one of the most significant interventions in British politics this year. It is not only an extraordinarily damning indictment of the current government from the most electorally successful Labour Prime Minister, but also a distinctive policy roadmap focused on economic growth.
Critics have piled in — particularly viciously in counter-essays by leadership hopefuls Wes Streeting and Andy Burnham — claiming Blair ignored inequality as the defining crisis of the age, and that 40 years of deregulation and privatisation, not a lack of growth, explain Britain’s predicament. But this month’s CityAM / Freshwater Strategy Poll reveals that the public is largely on the side of the former Prime Minister rather than Keir Starmer or his potential heirs.
When asked to choose a direction for the government, 59 per cent say they would prefer lower taxes, lighter regulation, and private-sector growth, compared to just 32 per cent who would prefer redistribution and higher public spending funded by taxes on wealth, property and capital. Notably, even a majority (55 per cent) of Labour supporters want Britain to take the growth-maximising approach.
When it comes to specifics, the picture is largely similar. There are robust majorities who agree with Blair that the government should do more to help workers whose jobs are at risk from new technology (78 per cent agree). Despite the squishiness of some Labour backbenches, voters agree with Blair on stronger measures to reduce illegal immigration by boat (73 per cent).
The public wants growth
The public also backs Blair’s pro-growth agenda in other ways, including prioritising cheaper energy over the current pace of the net zero transition (62 per cent) and in allowing new North Sea oil and gas drilling (59 per cent), in avoiding an above-inflation increase in the minimum wage (55 per cent), and are more likely to back planning reform (44 per cent in favour, 27 per cent against). Meanwhile, old shibboleths against the private sector in the NHS now appear to be dying, with a majority (54 per cent) happy to see greater use of private provision alongside public services. Despite some polls indicating superficial support for rejoining the European Union, voters even lean towards Blair’s view that this should be ruled out for the foreseeable future (41 per cent agree, 37 per cent against).
The enthusiasm is not shared for all of Blair’s essay, particularly when it is perceived to impose a direct financial cost. The public is yet to be persuaded of the case for making cuts to disability and incapacity benefits (28 per cent agree, 49 per cent disagree). They are also, albeit narrowly, against abolishing the pension triple lock (28 per cent agree, 31 per cent disagree). Voters are also simultaneously concerned that inequality is one of the most important problems facing the UK today (60 per cent agree, 17 per cent disagree), even while backing pro-growth measures.
The timing of Blair’s intervention could not be more notable. We are in the phoney war stage of Labour’s leadership contest, as Starmer holds on despite most wanting him to go, there is no formal leadership contest and we all wait with baited breathe for the voters of Makerfield later this month.
In the meantime, Blair’s central argument is that the real problem with the government is not personality or poor communications, but rather a more fundamental failure to develop a coherent agenda. This is an important warning, learnt repeatedly by the Tories during their time in government, that just changing a leader without working out what you’re for and who you’re for will, more likely than not, end in tears.
The top rivals for the throne, Streeting and Burnham, are both attempting to set out their stalls, but notably, the main electorate they expect to face is Labour members, whose views may not necessarily reflect those of the broader public. Burnham’s focus on the woes of “40 years of neoliberalism” might appeal to those more ideologically committed, but it is a difficult claim to sustain with taxes at a postwar record high and regulators wielding almost limitless power over the economy. The public’s views, particularly since this Labour government have come to power, are that things have taken a bit too much of a leftward turn. Blair, despite being considered by many a tad rusty, might just be a bit closer to the electorate than whoever ends up replacing Keir Starmer.
Matthew Lesh is country manager at Freshwater Strategy