Lord Ashcroft: Latest focus groups – “The only people they haven’t wound up are junior doctors and train drivers”

Lord Ashcroft KCMG PC is an international businessman, philanthropist, author and pollster. For more information on his work, visit lordashcroft.com

My latest round of focus groups included voters in Bristol, Taunton, Redcar and Middlesbrough. Most had voted Labour at the general election – many for the first time – with others having switched from the Conservatives to the Liberal Democrats.

“He seemed to come alive”

Whatever their voting backgrounds, many of our participants shared the view that Keir Starmer had performed well on the international stage. Some who had voted for him felt they finally had something to cheer about: “It’s really surprised me. I didn’t know he had that kind of statesmanlike approach. He’s done commendably well;” “He’s taken on a real leadership role, which I’ve not seen before. He was very careful and measured about everything, whereas I think he’s started to take a few more calculated risks;” “He seems stronger than he had before. He seemed to come alive.” Those who had backed other parties were also prepared to give the PM credit: “I didn’t rate him much, but in the last week or so he’s regained some credibility;” “He’s stepped up to the mark. He hasn’t redeemed himself fully, but a little bit.”

In particular, people praised the balance Starmer seemed to have struck between supporting Ukraine, rallying support in Europe, and maintaining a good relationship with President Trump (which even most left-leaning participants acknowledged was necessary if unpalatable): “I would probably have preferred him to tell Trump to jog on, but he’s not going to do that. That’s why he’s a politician and I’m not. He’s done well, supporting Ukraine but not attacking Trump for not supporting Ukraine;” “There’s only so much you can push back on. You’re only going to get so far with trying to butt heads or argue;” “You’ve got to maintain the dialogue and keep them onside because they’re the most powerful country in the world;” “If it was me, I’d have been like ‘listen here, you orange horrible man’, but he was able to be calm and eloquent, which is probably the mark of a good politician.”

Some were a bit more grudging, feeling that the bar for prime ministerial performance had been set so low by recent incumbents that people were now pleasantly surprised by basic political competence: “I’m glad it’s him and that the grown-ups were in the room rather than before. It would be scary if it was one of them;” “I don’t think it’s changed my view. He’s done what you would expect a UK prime minister to do. He’s stepped up.”

“Mental health is the new bad back. Something radical has to change”

Despite these plaudits, opinion remained much more downbeat on the domestic front.

The groups had picked up on the government’s plans for welfare reform, which had alarmed some longer-standing Labour voters.

Several complained that as with the winter fuel allowance, the government seemed to be choosing vulnerable people as easy targets in their drive to balance the books – the sort of behaviour they would usually associate with the Tories: “I voted Labour because they seemed more caring than other parties, so it’s disappointed me that it sounds like an automatic cutback from people who need it the most. It’s hard to get through in the first place;” “I feel like for any government coming in, benefits is the easy target – ‘we’re giving you this for free, so we’ll take it away’;” “There’s a difference between encouraging people back to work and forcing them. With PIP and long-term mental health problems, you’ve got to address the issue to give them the tools to go back. It sounds like they’re saying ‘get off your butt, stop being sad’;” “They did it with the pensioners and the heating allowance, and now the disabled with the PIPs. They should be going for the wealth;” “In the past they always said, ‘the Tories are horrible nasty people taking the benefits away’, and now they’re doing it.”

However, those who had switched to Labour from the Conservatives in 2024 tended to be more supportive of the government’s aims, feeling that too many people seemed to be living on benefits when they could work: “It’s about incentivising people back to work, but there are a lot of scare stories. There will be a lot that everybody will agree with, but the media will say disabled people are going to lose all their benefits, which isn’t true;” “People who genuinely need the benefits should be entitled to get them, but from the professional side I see people who know the system and how to fiddle it to get everything they need. And they do not need it;” “People pull the mental health card because they know if they get signed off they’re done for life, and they don’t have to pretend to go and look for work. Mental health has replaced the bad back. It’s frustrating for people who work. Something radical has to change;” “My mother, bless her soul, knew exactly what to say, who to say it to and at what time of day to get the right person to get the most out of the system. If they can crack down on people abusing the system, that’s an absolute positive for the country.”

“You should be sentenced by the crime, not who you are”

Most of the groups had heard about the new guidelines from the Sentencing Council under which judges will be asked to consider a defendant’s ethnic, cultural and religious background before sentencing. The idea was universally and angrily rejected by our groups, whatever their voting history: “I think it’s wrong. I can’t think of one benefit from it;” “It’s totally biased against… me;” “In the past there may have been bias in sentencing certain backgrounds, skin colours or whatever, but if the pendulum swings the other way, which it sounds like it has, you’re not solving the problem. You’re just moving it to somewhere else;” “It’s two-tier sentences. We should stop this racism;” “It’s a disgrace. You should be sentenced by the crime, not who you are.”

A few had heard that the Justice Secretary was unhappy with the changes and had protested to the Sentencing Council, but none were impressed by this: for one thing, it sounded like the sort of thing Labour would do, and for another, they were in government and presumably had the power to change things if they really wanted to: “They let all the inmates out, didn’t they, but then put people in prison for things they put on social media;” “I’d guess it was someone like Cherie Blair, and the human rights movement. They all came in last time Labour were in power, and now they’re in again, so something mental like this comes about;” “I know they’re supposed to be independent from the government, but the Lady Justice or whatever they call her had her representatives there, so she’s allowed it to go through. She said it’s not right, but if it’s not right, get rid of it.”

“The only people they haven’t wound up are junior doctors and train drivers”

Assessing Labour’s performance more generally, as in previous grounds the groups often talked about winter fuel, tax rises (especially national insurance and inheritance tax on farms), and a general feeling of dissatisfaction: “There’s always been a question about competence. That nonsense about the chief of staff who left Downing Street, that was a complete farce. It paints a picture of political failure;” “The worst thing is that after they were elected it was clear that they had no plan on how to stimulate growth. They said they wanted to go to businesses to get ideas. To me that’s appalling. They had no plans for government;” “All they’ve done is piss everybody off. I don’t know if the winter fuel thing was just them saying ‘this is different Labour, we’re going to be harder,’ but they haven’t done anything massively effective. The only people they haven’t wound up are junior doctors and train drivers, with their massive pay rises.”

Despite their plaudits for his international efforts, few said their view of Keir Starmer had been transformed: “He doesn’t come across as strong. I think he’s heavily influenced by those around him. He seems a bit of a puppet;” “He’s never been honest. As soon as he came into power, he ditched the gas and electric for the elderly;” “I wanted a change from the elitist, corrupt party of the Conservatives, and the first thing that came out was that he’d been accepting clothes and glasses. That was a big disappointment, because I thought he was going to be different.”

Longer-term Labour supporters were eager to give the government the benefit of the doubt, given the situation it inherited, and the international “spanners” thrown into the works. A few pointed to progress on housing, teachers’ pay, employment rights and rail renationalisation. Even so, it was clear that an element of disappointment and frustration was creeping in. Some felt the government was being less bold or radical than they had hoped, and sometimes seemed to have an inconsistent message: “Keir Starmer is like a grey man who has basically taken over Tory policies. Really, I wanted to see revolutionary change. I wanted to have hope and optimism. I wanted there to be a welfare state. I wanted the NHS fully funded but it seems like we’re going down the path of privatisation;” “I don’t hear much about what they’re doing for Gaza and Palestine;” “I was hoping for some improvement in living costs. I thought there was going to be a lot more   – not necessarily relief, but a plan of action to work towards making it better;” “Considering it was a shoo-in that they were going to get elected, you’d assume they would have a blueprint for all these things they were promising. And they just haven’t;” “With the NHS privatisation by stealth, not paying the Waspi women, cuts to PIP, it’s all targeting the most vulnerable or those who are not rich and powerful. Since they call themselves the Labour party, it does have a very Conservative feel to it. Nye Bevan would be rolling in his grave;” “When they did their big announcement about the third runway at Heathrow there was F-all about the environment in the speech. And GB Energy is another example of not being bold enough. It all just gets watered down.”

“Show us a bit of ankle”

With the Conservatives having “gone into the woodwork” (whether because they are still “licking their wounds and regathering their troops,” trying to work out what they stand for, keeping their heads down while Labour mess things up, or “twiddling their cartoon moustaches behind a curtain somewhere”), the biggest opposition story was the Farage-Lowe schism in Reform UK – and this had passed most people by. The fact that Rupert Lowe was suspended from the party for alleged bullying immediately after criticising the leader certainly looked “fishy”, but the row had not changed anyone’s view of the party one way or the other.

However, some who were potentially interested in the party in their own way echoed Lowe’s observation that Reform needed to progress from being “a protest party led by the Messiah”: “I like the man a lot, but I don’t know any of his policies yet. I think he should start getting it out there because people are beginning to turn. People say he’s a populist and they don’t know what he stands for, which is right really. Show us a bit of ankle, a bit more substance.”

Some left-leaning voters who were hostile to Reform nevertheless thought the party posed a threat to Labour, especially if it fails to deliver the changes people believe they have been promised: “It’s quite scary to think how many people agree with their stance on things, when you look around the world at Germany and America. It’s a scary future to think about;” “I worry that Labour aren’t making enough changes. Even if it’s sort of understandable because it takes time, I worry that by the time we have another election people will use that as an excuse to vote for someone else. People lose faith in Labour and the Conservatives, and they’re literally called ‘reform’;” “They should learn from their past mistakes, what happened in the referendum, not underestimate people and assume everything is going to go swimmingly;” “Stick to the manifesto, perhaps deliver what you promised before you got into power. How about that?”

“Somewhere fun that doesn’t have an army”

In line with the international flavour of recent events, if Keir Starmer were a country – other than the UK – which country would he be?

“Somewhere small and neutral, like Sweden or Switzerland. Sitting on the fence, not really taking a side;” “I was going to say the Republic of Ireland, but I think they’ve got a bit more fire in them than Keir;” “Germany. Very precise, follows the rules, not a lot of warmth;” “Belgium – bland, forgettable;” “Ukraine – he’s fighting the good fight, but it doesn’t feel like he’s winning.”

Kemi Badenoch? “Texas, quite forthright and single-minded;” “Australia. They just get on with whatever they’re doing, and you don’t hear much from them;” “Andorra, because I don’t know anything about it. A small insignificant country that no-one takes any notice of.”

Nigel Farage? “He’s got a US vibe to him. Chaotic and single-minded, wants to be a celebrity, ginormous ego. Outspoken and willing to stand up and say what they think;” “Trump’s America – bit of a bully, bit of a bighead;” “Australia, because they have strict rules about letting people in;” “Italy, because he’s all gusto, loud and gesticulating, and he likes a drink, but there’s not a lot of substance there;” “South Africa, brash and outspoken;” “Ireland, because he loves a divide.”

And finally, what about Ed Davey? “Denmark. A bit different, but inconsequential. It doesn’t really matter what Denmark does;” “Costa Rica. Somewhere fun that doesn’t have an army.”