Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
In the aggregate it’s correct as the polling shows; it appeals to people with lower levels of completed education who will feel more vulnerable to the changes happening in society. It does not mean every single person who votes for them is uneducated.
Across the political spectrum, the current term used to describe the cohort which is currently responding positively to Reform messaging is 'Economically Illiterate - Socially Conservative.'
Reform, and other 'associations' on the right, have thus far been very successful in ensuring that they never refer to their constituency using that or similar terms in public, whilst inferring or explicitly suggesting that those towards the centre and beyond do dismiss their supporters as being some flavour of that description.
Labour won the most votes of the age 18-24 group (and everyone else up to the age of 59), although men in this group were more likely to vote Reform and women more likely to vote Green;
Reform gained a higher proportion of votes in the 'low education' group (defined as GCSE but no higher)
Just to mention here though that, if you look polls for any elections (local elections, general election, Scottish Parliament, etc), support for Reform has massively ramped up since the 2024 general election. In the local elections this month, Reform came 1st and Labour 4th. It may be true that the demographics of Reform voters are the same/similar as in the 2024 general election, but I wouldn't be so sure. People have clearly cottoned on to the notion that Reform do have the potential to win elections and are voting for them rather than reluctantly voting for a major party on the basis it's a wasted vote otherwise.
I do also think, if we want to talk about young people specifically, that the younger generation is increasingly disenfranchised with the economic policies of the major parties. For a long time the major parties, knowing that older people vote in greater proportions than younger people, have avoided making difficult political decisions for e.g. pensioners (like removing the unsustainable triple lock) while simultaneously bankrolling such commitments through taxes on young people (like unsustainable tuition fees). When the two largest parties are basically committing to the same policies, and those policies adversely affect younger people, it shouldn't be too surprising that younger people seek an alternative. Briefly, the Lib Dems offered this, but then they broke their pledge to students on tuition fees despite negotiating a free vote on the matter in the coalition agreement.
Reform will attempt to capitalise on this and win over younger voters, those with higher levels of academic qualification, etc.
Reform says a team lead by an as-yet unnamed tech entrepreneur will review council spending in Kent.
www.bbc.co.uk
Reform has announced it will send its first Elon Musk-style Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) team into local authorities to assess "wasteful spending".
The party said the first council to be audited will be Kent County Council, one of the councils the party took control of in May's local elections.
In a statement released late on Sunday, party chairman Zia Yusuf said it would be "led by one of the UK's leading tech entrepreneurs", although it is not yet known who that is.
The leader of the Liberal Democrat opposition in Kent said he believes it will be "more performance than substance".
It follows the US Doge, which was launched during Donald Trump's presidency to cut federal spending. Billionaire Musk was involved but has since left his position spearheading the unit.
Reform said a team of software engineers, data analysts and forensic auditors will "visit and analyse" local authorities. In the elections on 1 May the party took control of eight authorities from the Conservatives, along with Doncaster from Labour and Durham, which was run as a coalition.
Given DOGE has reportedly not been very successful, with savings well down on targets and the possibility of ramifications from certain essential services being cut, this has the potential to blow up in Reform UK's face down the line, especially if damage from DOGE actions in the US keeps surfacing. This is one reason that they could well be riding high too soon - once they've got a record in some form of government, this can be used against them in 2028/29.
Reform says a team lead by an as-yet unnamed tech entrepreneur will review council spending in Kent.
www.bbc.co.uk
Given DOGE has reportedly not been very successful, with savings well down on targets and the possibility of ramifications from certain essential services being cut, this has the potential to blow up in Reform UK's face down the line, especially if damage from DOGE actions in the US keeps surfacing. This is one reason that they could well be riding high too soon - once they've got a record in some form of government, this can be used against them in 2028/29.
On the flip side, I've previously worked in the public sector long enough to know that there is some absolutely ridiculous waste. One of Reform's DOGE's pledges for Kent council was to abolish final salary DB pension schemes - that's a very sensible decision which could save the council a fortune. They're looking to target 'DEI' (a US term I don't particularly like), and while I'm quite in favour of diversity programmes, I do think some public bodies go way over the top in this area and some DEI jobs are completely unnecessary.
I'm no Reform supporter, but I'm not really against some auditing of spending at councils, who in my experience living in Wales, England, and Scotland, are often not getting value for money from their spending.
I genuinely sympathise with a lot of Reform voters because they see all the symptoms and with the current leadership of the main parties, very few of the solutions.
On the flip side, I've previously worked in the public sector long enough to know that there is some absolutely ridiculous waste. One of Reform's DOGE's pledges for Kent council was to abolish final salary DB pension schemes - that's a very sensible decision which could save the council a fortune. They're looking to target 'DEI' (a US term I don't particularly like), and while I'm quite in favour of diversity programmes, I do think some public bodies go way over the top in this area and some DEI jobs are completely unnecessary.
I did find it amusing that after that aspersion was cast at one particular Council (forget which) they stated they did not in fact employ any diversity officers or any other similar role, and that that function was just a (fairly small) part of other management roles.
I would agree there's a lot of waste in some Councils though and a kick up the backside on this would be no harm. But some of that waste is structural, e.g. the whole "spend your budget in March or you won't get it again" type nonsense that resulted in stuff like the painting of the unnecessary bus lanes in Central Milton Keynes on a road which is never congested even at 8:45 on a Tuesday morning. Indeed they're actively harmful as since they were put in there have been a number of accidents with cars turning across buses and getting T-boned.
I did find it amusing that after that aspersion was cast at one particular Council (forget which) they stated they did not in fact employ any diversity officers or any other similar role, and that that function was just a (fairly small) part of other management roles.
I would agree there's a lot of waste in some Councils though and a kick up the backside on this would be no harm. But some of that waste is structural, e.g. the whole "spend your budget in March or you won't get it again" type nonsense that resulted in stuff like the painting of the unnecessary bus lanes in Central Milton Keynes on a road which is never congested even at 8:45 on a Tuesday morning. Indeed they're actively harmful as since they were put in there have been a number of accidents with cars turning across buses and getting T-boned.
Oh totally agree, some of it is not party political at all. I used to work for a university administering mobile devices and at the end of the financial year the number of employees ordering the latest iPhone rocketed. Some of the people ordering these devices worked in roles where even sending text messages wasn't necessary, let alone apps and the latest hi-spec camera. Other departments would spunk the money on beer and BBQs - a nice perk for students, but hardly a responsible use of taxpayer funds (which most university funds are for undergrads).
I very much doubt Reform will sort a lot of this out, but I don't necessarily disagree with their high level goal of reducing costs.
On the flip side, I've previously worked in the public sector long enough to know that there is some absolutely ridiculous waste. One of Reform's DOGE's pledges for Kent council was to abolish final salary DB pension schemes - that's a very sensible decision which could save the council a fortune. They're looking to target 'DEI' (a US term I don't particularly like), and while I'm quite in favour of diversity programmes, I do think some public bodies go way over the top in this area and some DEI jobs are completely unnecessary.
It is of course possible that things improve, but likening their work to a scheme that is not looking positive so far, combined with stories about abolishing stuff that either doesn't exist or is much less than claimed (like DEI and LTNs) doesn't point towards a positive outcome as things stand.
I'm no Reform supporter, but I'm not really against some auditing of spending at councils, who in my experience living in Wales, England, and Scotland, are often not getting value for money from their spending.
The issue I hear most is councils being responsible for social care spending is a huge drain on their resources. There's probably a whole new discussion around how sorting this out is necessary for all councils, irrespective of who is controlling them, to deliver other services better.
I genuinely sympathise with a lot of Reform voters because they see all the symptoms and with the current leadership of the main parties, very few of the solutions.
What's needed here is grassroots' campaigning on specific issues to encourage existing parties to implement them, rather than just waiting and hoping the answer turns up. This is what allows the likes of Reform, and maybe also the Greens, to gain traction by saying things that sound great but have limited evidence backing them up.
What's needed here is grassroots' campaigning on specific issues to encourage existing parties to implement them, rather than just waiting and hoping the answer turns up. This is what allows the likes of Reform, and maybe also the Greens, to gain traction by saying things that sound great but have limited evidence backing them up.
Sounds great, but when Corbyn tried this with all the grassroots support he had, he got expelled from the party which frankly was historically more aligned with his views than any other PLP member.
The whole system is broken, and Reform will capitalise on this.
Sounds great, but when Corbyn tried this with all the grassroots support he had, he got expelled from the party which frankly was historically more aligned with his views than any other PLP member.
The whole system is broken, and Reform will capitalise on this.
No. Corbyn was just disastrous. Why? Because he was an utter whopper who displayed crank positions and views at every turn that made him and easy target for criticism from the press and from people in the street.
He also lacked any practicality, realism or maturity and couldn't run a bath. He has/had the political nouse of a child and zero leadership skills.
On the flip side, I've previously worked in the public sector long enough to know that there is some absolutely ridiculous waste. One of Reform's DOGE's pledges for Kent council was to abolish final salary DB pension schemes - that's a very sensible decision which could save the council a fortune.
I think measure like cutting pension schemes and making people work from the office is going to backfire massively on Reform. Local authorities (LA) struggle to hire currently, making workers T&Cs worse isn't going to attract employees. I'd have the option to work at a local authority in my line of work, but I also have the option to work in the private sector or a city region combined authority. LAs pay around 15-20% less than both the private sector and combined authorities. The main benefits of working at an LA is the better pension scheme and lower working hours/increased flexibility. If that is taken away, why would any talented individual want to work at an LA?
I don't really see how libertarianism , and Farage and Tice are certainly economic libertarians at heart, works at UK local government level. How can people who believe in minimising public services run them successfully? With very limited control over spending and tax raising, how will Reform implement the tax cutting policies they believe will create growth? It could be argued that its the councilors that are running the councils and they may not share the same libiterian views as Farage, but the past month has shown that Farage clearly intends to control the councils.
The guy is clearly a massive control freak which I think will ultimately be his undoing. One man simply can't control a major party to the extent Farage wants to.
I don't really see how libertarianism , and Farage and Tice are certainly economic libertarians at heart, works at UK local government level. How can people who believe in minimising public services run them successfully?
I don't trust that Reform will, but I don't see a fundamental conflict between "doing only a few essentials" and "doing those essentials really well". Indeed if your business/organisation is small and simple it's easier to deliver a high quality service.
I think measure like cutting pension schemes and making people work from the office is going to backfire massively on Reform. Local authorities (LA) struggle to hire currently, making workers T&Cs worse isn't going to attract employees.
I'd have the option to work at a local authority in my line of work, but I also have the option to work in the private sector or a city region combined authority. LAs pay around 15-20% less than both the private sector and combined authorities.
The main benefits of working at an LA is the better pension scheme and lower working hours/increased flexibility. If that is taking away, why would any talented individual want to work at an LA?
Reform haven't proposed removing DB pensions or increasing contracted working hours.
They've proposed getting rid of final salary DB pensions, which are frankly ridiculous and often abused by people seeking retirement in cahoots with their bosses giving them hurrah pay rises in their final few months or years.
I don't really see how libertarianism , and Farage and Tice are certainly economic libertarians at heart, works at UK local government level. How can people who believe in minimising public services run them successfully?
While local authorities aren't in the same position as central government when it comes to borrowing for example, they do have significant control over local finances. If they employ a group who go around and say this isn't needed and that can be 1 person not 5 people, they can make significant cost savings, and use that to pay down debts or invest in the obvious election winning stuff like filling in potholes. Honestly where I live if you filled in potholes and dealt with fly tipping you'd win a ridiculous amount of support, and the voter would look beyond your shirt term economic outlook.
It could be argued that its the councilors that are running the councils and they may not share the same libiterian views as Farage, but the past month has shown that Farage clearly intends to control the councils.
The guy is clearly a massive control freak which I think will ultimately be his undoing. One man simply can't control a major party to the extent Farage wants to.
Absolutely. He is a control freak, and one weekend should take seriously. Unfortunately a lot of the criticism I see publicly made against Farage and Reform resorts to petty insults or vague jibes. There's lots to criticise him and his party on, but we won't win any Reform voters back by just calling them stupid or branding the party "anti-intellectual".
We have to remember that even if we believe Reform voters to be, on average say, less intelligent, Farage and his senior advisors are not. They know full well how to play the electorate and if we dismiss Reform so easily, they'll succeed.
Reform haven't proposed removing DB pensions or increasing contracted working hours.
They've proposed getting rid of final salary DB pensions, which are frankly ridiculous and often abused by people seeking retirement in cahoots with their bosses giving them hurrah pay rises in their final few months or years.
But Reform are quite happy to characterise local government workers as overpaid and work shy. They may not have a specifically proposed cuts to pay or the vast majority of pensions, but surely if they believe workers than overpaid then that is the logical step. They've certainly said they'll ban homeworking and flexible hours that are one of the major benefits of working for a local council. Eve the rhetoric isn't going to help employment. There's no way I'd work for a Reform council or one that has the potential to vote Reform.
But when the vast majority of spending is legally required and councils don't have anywhere near enough funding after a decade of Conservative central government cuts, how do you apply Conservative cuts. A lot of central government funding comes with strings attached too.
While local authorities aren't in the same position as central government when it comes to borrowing for example, they do have significant control over local finances. If they employ a group who go around and say this isn't needed and that can be 1 person not 5 people, they can make significant cost savings, and use that to pay down debts or invest in the obvious election winning stuff like filling in potholes. Honestly where I live if you filled in potholes and dealt with fly tipping you'd win a ridiculous amount of support, and the voter would look beyond your shirt term economic outlook.
As I mentioned above, there's very little room to do that and local authorities are already massively understaffed in my experience working with them. Even the things that Reform don't like such as cycle lanes are often funded through central government grants, so the only option will be to not accept the grant.
Absolutely. He is a control freak, and one weekend should take seriously. Unfortunately a lot of the criticism I see publicly made against Farage and Reform resorts to petty insults or vague jibes. There's lots to criticise him and his party on, but we won't win any Reform voters back by just calling them stupid or branding the party "anti-intellectual".
We have to remember that even if we believe Reform voters to be, on average say, less intelligent, Farage and his senior advisors are not. They know full well how to play the electorate and if we dismiss Reform so easily, they'll succeed.
I agree, Farage can and should be tackled based on his policies and behaviour. A lot of potential Reform voters have genuine concerns about lack of investment and even immigration. I have family members who vote Reform and I can certainly understand some of the reasoning.
The typical outcome of this is that the public entity doesn't have enough or skilled enough staff, so has to hire in expensive consultants to undertake it's core competencies.
I think it's actually a key component of Reform's appeal. Of course Labour or whoever aren't going to have placards saying "you seem like you are sub-100 IQ, please come and vote for us" - nobody wins votes like that. Reform may have some smart and clever people pulling the levers but none of them are intellectuals like the "big nerd" Keir Starmer.
I think we should be under no illusions that any major party wanting to win those voters back will need to use very simple ideas that require little political engagement and will involve no "experts" - any complexity will have to be carefully concealed. The world is inherently more complicated - perhaps an order of magnitude more than it was in the 90s - and people in a precarious social or economic position who do not have a high level of education will feel threatened by the pace of change. There's no point talking around the edges of the topic; doing that for two decades gave us Brexit because some opinions about immigration were unjustly suppressed or made verboten. These people need a fairer political settlement - no doubt about it.
Many of the political issues Reform are raising are aesthetic rather than pragmatic - visible problems of actual decline. The main driver of many of the attitudes of Reform voters is a feeling of the country "going to the dogs", something which it is hard to disagree with! The country is a dump; it is visibly less prosperous and pleasant than many supposed peer countries. The main job for the government should be increasing productivity, GDP, and redistributing wealth more fairly.
Reform cannot be defeated by outflanking and legitimisation, only by the reinvigoration of its voter base to become less inclined to press a big red button to reset the political machine. (They already tried it once with Brexit, which was a failure!)
The typical outcome of this is that the public entity doesn't have enough or skilled enough staff, so has to hire in expensive consultants to undertake it's core competencies.
I don't wholly disagree, but my point is Reform will capitalise on this. They can get rid of contractors with no notice - easy win. They can remove the tiny number of "DEI" posts - easy win. They can get rid of the final salary DB pensions - easy win.
In the next 12 months the difference to their citizens may be minimal, but e.g. up here in Scotland it may be long enough for people to continue to believe their lines and vote for them.
I'm concerned really that so many people are complacent about Reform. They're a serious threat, and until Labour, Conservatives, and Lib Dems (and the SNP in Scotland) respond to the concerns of voters, I believe Reform will continue to do well.
Just to mention here though that, if you look polls for any elections (local elections, general election, Scottish Parliament, etc), support for Reform has massively ramped up since the 2024 general election. In the local elections this month, Reform came 1st and Labour 4th. It may be true that the demographics of Reform voters are the same/similar as in the 2024 general election, but I wouldn't be so sure. People have clearly cottoned on to the notion that Reform do have the potential to win elections and are voting for them rather than reluctantly voting for a major party on the basis it's a wasted vote otherwise.
I do also think, if we want to talk about young people specifically, that the younger generation is increasingly disenfranchised with the economic policies of the major parties. For a long time the major parties, knowing that older people vote in greater proportions than younger people, have avoided making difficult political decisions for e.g. pensioners (like removing the unsustainable triple lock) while simultaneously bankrolling such commitments through taxes on young people (like unsustainable tuition fees). When the two largest parties are basically committing to the same policies, and those policies adversely affect younger people, it shouldn't be too surprising that younger people seek an alternative. Briefly, the Lib Dems offered this, but then they broke their pledge to students on tuition fees despite negotiating a free vote on the matter in the coalition agreement.
Reform will attempt to capitalise on this and win over younger voters, those with higher levels of academic qualification, etc.
This does not take into account the much more extreme nature of Reform compared to Labour, the Tories, the Lib Dems, etc.
All the below is my own opinions only, but:
I am unconvinced that their appeal will extend much beyond the strongly socially conservative, the reactionary, or the naive and easily led - though that cohort could well add up to 30% and that's where the worry lies. I can't see them appealing to "people with higher levels of academic qualification" who would be more likely to see through their bluster, critically analyse their "promises" and quickly come to the conclusion that they will not fix the country's problems. All they are likely to do, in my opinion, is increase the national debt, brutally cut the public sector leading to massive job losses, and quite possibly reduce civil rights for marginalised groups.
I just can't see Reform appealing to the centre at all. It doesn't matter that Labour, the Tories or the Lib Dems are less than perfect. Fact is, that all three have seen some kind of power, all three are a known quantity and all three, relatively speaking, offer something which is not too extreme.
If people have any modicum of empathy with migrants, the LGBTQ+ community, people with mental health problems, or any marginalised group they would surely not touch Reform with a bargepole. If people want a healthy economy and healthy public sector they won't touch Reform with a bargepole unless they are hopelessly naive.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I'm concerned really that so many people are complacent about Reform. They're a serious threat, and until Labour, Conservatives, and Lib Dems (and the SNP in Scotland) respond to the concerns of voters, I believe Reform will continue to do well.
I do wonder what the best way to fight them is. I think highlighting their right-wing and reactionary policies will have an effect (maybe some people don't understand how right-wing Reform are?), but I also think a) the other parties need to urgently together including - dare I say it - the Conservatives and the more centre-left parties - to fight them and b) the Government needs to get some form of PR onto the statute books before 2029. PR will minimise the chance of them getting into government, I suspect.
I doubt the Tories under Badenoch will be willing to work with the more centre-left parties but a new and more centrist Tory leader might. I suspect Cameronite and Majorite Tories are as worried by Reform as the liberal left are.
As for responding to the concerns of voters, I suspect the current Government are trying but they are presumably hamstrung by the economic situation at the moment. And Reform don't help the situation; Reform is yet another thing for the Government to have to worry about on top of a long list already. If you were Keir Starmer what would you do differently? (Genuine question).
If you have any modicum of empathy with migrants, the LGBTQ+ community, people with mental health problems, or any marginalised group you would not touch Reform with a bargepole.
I think it's this misinterpretation of their actual policies which leads people to dismiss anti-Reform commentators to be quite honest.
I suppose we can continue with the approach of being condescending to Reform voters and politicians, but I personally wouldn't bank on it winning back many votes.
Edit: your post has been edited and trebled in size since I saw it and made my comment so my comment here is only reflective of the original comment. My sausages are ready so may ready the longer version later!
I think it's this misinterpretation of their actual policies which leads people to dismiss anti-Reform commentators to be quite honest.
I suppose we can continue with the approach of being condescending to Reform voters and politicians, but I personally wouldn't bank on it winning back many votes.
Well they keep banging on about migrants, climate change, and trans people, and one fairly prominent member has appeared to dismiss depression as not existing.
They keep banging on about cutting "woke" responsibilities of councils.
If they do this, do they really expect anything else in terms of criticism? Is it any wonder many of us consider them as reactionary, loud-mouthed hardline right-wingers?
It's not "condescending" to criticise them. Calling it "condescending" just sounds like a way to shut down criticism of them, I am afraid.
It's absolutely pathetic the way that the populist right and rich, powerful people like Farage try to play the victim.
Well they keep banging on about migrants, climate change, and trans people, and one fairly prominent member has appeared to dismiss depression as not existing.
They keep banging on about cutting "woke" responsibilities of councils.
If they do this, do they really expect anything else in terms of criticism?
It's not "condescending" to criticise them. Calling it "condescending" just sounds like a way to shut down criticism of them, I am afraid.
It's absolutely pathetic the way that the populist right and rich, powerful people like Farage try to play the victim.
I think it's condescending to suggest if you're gay or have mental health problems then you can't vote Reform, yes. If we take this attitude, we will only serve to entrench anti-establishment views in people who have been let down by the current systems.
Like I say, we can carry on taking this view - we've done so for a fair while now and experienced Farage leading the largest UK contingent to the EU, Trump being elected US president twice, Brexit; or we can tackle the rooted concerns.
I think it's condescending to suggest if you're gay or have mental health problems then you can't vote Reform, yes. If we take this attitude, we will only serve to entrench anti-establishment views in people who have been let down by the current systems.
Well obviously anyone can vote for who they like, but I was suggesting that if you have empathy for marginalised groups, especially those which Reform have explicitly mentioned, voting for them is an odd choice.
Like I say, we can carry on taking this view - we've done so for a fair while now and experienced Farage leading the largest UK contingent to the EU, Trump being elected US president twice, Brexit; or we can tackle the rooted concerns.
So how do you "tackle the rooted concerns"?
We've all got concerns, I've got plenty of concerns myself, both economic and social - I am deeply worried about a perfect storm of big economic problems and growing authoritarianism in the not too distant future - but I also accept that Starmer cannot wave a magic wand and make all our problems go away.
What I would like to see is politicians with a more positive attitude - a combination of socially-liberal, sensitive to people's financial worries when making economic decisions, promoting economic growth, and supporting the public sector all in one package. I can't see Reform doing any of this if I am honest.
I do think the 2020s have been a very, very negative decade so far. But Reform will certainly not make things any more positive, in my opinion.
This does not take into account the much more extreme nature of Reform compared to Labour, the Tories, the Lib Dems, etc.
All the below is my own opinions only, but:
I am unconvinced that their appeal will extend much beyond the strongly socially conservative, the reactionary, or the naive and easily led - though that cohort could well add up to 30% and that's where the worry lies. I can't see them appealing to "people with higher levels of academic qualification" who would be more likely to see through their bluster, critically analyse their "promises" and quickly come to the conclusion that they will not fix the country's problems. All they are likely to do, in my opinion, is increase the national debt, brutally cut the public sector leading to massive job losses, and quite possibly reduce civil rights for marginalised groups.
I just can't see Reform appealing to the centre at all. It doesn't matter that Labour, the Tories or the Lib Dems are less than perfect. Fact is, that all three have seen some kind of power, all three are a known quantity and all three, relatively speaking, offer something which is not too extreme.
If people have any modicum of empathy with migrants, the LGBTQ+ community, people with mental health problems, or any marginalised group they would surely not touch Reform with a bargepole. If people want a healthy economy and healthy public sector they won't touch Reform with a bargepole unless they are hopelessly naive.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I do wonder what the best way to fight them is. I think highlighting their right-wing and reactionary policies will have an effect (maybe some people don't understand how right-wing Reform are?), but I also think a) the other parties need to urgently together including - dare I say it - the Conservatives and the more centre-left parties - to fight them and b) the Government needs to get some form of PR onto the statute books before 2029. PR will minimise the chance of them getting into government, I suspect.
I doubt the Tories under Badenoch will be willing to work with the more centre-left parties but a new and more centrist Tory leader might. I suspect Cameronite and Majorite Tories are as worried by Reform as the liberal left are.
As for responding to the concerns of voters, I suspect the current Government are trying but they are presumably hamstrung by the economic situation at the moment. And Reform don't help the situation; Reform is yet another thing for the Government to have to worry about on top of a long list already. If you were Keir Starmer what would you do differently? (Genuine question).
Bolded sections: I think you're being a touch naive, and taking the assumption that Reform voters/the average person (delete as appropriate) actually care(s) about politics and policies. They don't. They care about the tangible benefits to them. Given many of them come from depressed and forgotten-about areas of the country that have been ignored at best by every government from Thatcher onwards, it's not an unreasonable viewpoint. Why they feel that Farage will benefit them is a question I'm not qualified to answer, but it seems to be a mixture of "he cares about people like us" and "we've tried everyone else and that hasn't worked, so why not give him a chance and stick two fingers up to the government" (aka the Brexit argument).
I understand that you can't believe how anyone could vote Reform, but you have your own deeply-held political views, and are extremely politically involved and have a very good understanding of political viewpoints. The same is not true of the average voter - indeed, none of the three, really, with the possible exception of the first.
As for the section I've underlined: sack Morgan McSweeney; pivot towards a more left-wing economic model that would a) enthuse "typical" Labour voters heading towards Reform and b) leave Farage in a tricky position to sell his fantasy economics to said groups; ensure that every political idea that is denied has a very clear reason given for it; gain a basic understanding of media politics so that you don't get negative publicity over the likes of swift bricks for no obviously apparent reason. (Descending order of importance.)
I am convinced that Reform's appeal will extend beyond these groups. Reform is making noises about scrapping the two-child benefit cap. These noises will resonate with people who actually work hard and lost out because they simply fell foul of the Tories' cruelty. Labour is supposed to be the party of working people but doesn't appear to be doing anything to reverse those policies.
If people have any modicum of empathy with migrants, the LGBTQ+ community, people with mental health problems, or any marginalised group they would surely not touch Reform with a bargepole. If people want a healthy economy and healthy public sector they won't touch Reform with a bargepole unless they are hopelessly naive
I'm afraid that you are being naive here. While people may have some empathy with some marginalised groups, they will vote for whatever best suits their individual circumstances. Principles don't pay the bills.
I detest Farage and his "party", but they should not be underestimated.
Money talks and there are lots of people with very deep pockets backing them. Let's not be complacent.
Well obviously anyone can vote for who they like, but I was suggesting that if you have empathy for marginalised groups, especially those which Reform have explicitly mentioned, voting for them is an odd choice.
So how do you "tackle the rooted concerns"?
We've all got concerns, I've got plenty of concerns myself, both economic and social - I am deeply worried about a perfect storm of big economic problems and growing authoritarianism in the not too distant future - but I also accept that Starmer cannot wave a magic wand and make all our problems go away.
What I would like to see is politicians with a more positive attitude - a combination of socially-liberal, sensitive to people's financial worries when making economic decisions, promoting economic growth, and supporting the public sector all in one package. I can't see Reform doing any of this if I am honest.
I do think the 2020s have been a very, very negative decade so far. But Reform will certainly not make things any more positive, in my opinion.
Yes but you haven't actually mentioned any Reform UK policies which make voting for them so terrible for e.g. gay people. Gay Reform voters will rightly just entrench themselves.
It's really hard to reply to your comments when you make massive edits to them after posting them, can you please not lol
I am convinced that Reform's appeal will extend beyond these groups. Reform is making noises about scrapping the two-child benefit cap. These noises will resonate with people who actually work hard and lost out because they simply fell foul of the Tories' cruelty. Labour is supposed to be the party of working people but doesn't appear to be doing anything to reverse those policies.
But why Reform? They are certainly not a party that care about people who have fallen on financial hard times, IMO. They might make promises to lure people in, but will they really be caring, sharing left-wingers in power? I think not!
Why don't people vote for the radical left, instead? To me that would make much more sense.
I'm afraid that you are being naive here. While people may have some empathy with some marginalised groups, they will vote for whatever best suits their individual circumstances. Principles don't pay the bills.
But how would Reform suit their individual circumstances? Reform seem to want to make DOGE-like cuts, who will that help?
The only groups that Reform would benefit seem to me to be those who believe there are too many immigrants in the country and those who believe minority rights have gone too far.
I do feel I'm not being at all complacent though - hence my (probably rather radical sounding) suggestion that all the other parties, including the Tories, need to cast aside differences and work together to keep them out, including forming a "national coalition" if necessary. Hence my suggestion that we need to get some PR in very soon, to minimise the impact if they do receive the most votes in the next election. Hence my suggestion (not made here, admittedly) that grassroots, non-party-political anti-Reform campaigns need to get going, and get going now. Hence my suggestion (again not made) that perhaps we need a new strongly left-wing party.
Reform has for the most part so far been able to avoid giving details of what it intends to do and how they will do it. This makes it difficult for other parties to start pointing out the impossibilities in what they claim they are going to do. Only when they have to start answering questions explaining why one of their policies will have negative consequences will they have problems, but I fear that Reform’s councils will turn round and claim that the government are victimising them and should provide more support. We will have to see if local media tries to question their actions or just rolls over and cheers like much of the national media.
And never under estimate people of all levels of intellectual ability’s propensity to grab at simple answers which pander to their greed and selfishness.
Yes but you haven't actually mentioned any Reform UK policies which make voting for them so terrible for e.g. gay people. Gay Reform voters will rightly just entrench themselves.
It's what I perceive as their general attitude. They just come across as militantly and irrationally anti-liberal and anti-woke. This rings major alarm bells for me.
This is only because I feel I sometimes need to rephrase things, or remove irrelevant comments that clutter things up on reflection, I hope you can understand that.
I don't wholly disagree, but my point is Reform will capitalise on this. They can get rid of contractors with no notice - easy win. They can remove the tiny number of "DEI" posts - easy win. They can get rid of the final salary DB pensions - easy win.
In the next 12 months the difference to their citizens may be minimal, but e.g. up here in Scotland it may be long enough for people to continue to believe their lines and vote for them.
I'm concerned really that so many people are complacent about Reform. They're a serious threat, and until Labour, Conservatives, and Lib Dems (and the SNP in Scotland) respond to the concerns of voters, I believe Reform will continue to do well.
At first glance, you may think that such cuts are easy wins, however you run the risk of things going very won't very quickly.
For instance, if a council fails to provide a decision on a planning application (and whilst that's less of an issue for county councils - although they are statutory consultees so could be a factor) in good time the applicant may take them to appeal, if they win then the planning inspector may grant costs against the council to the applicant.
Whilst most households probably won't, larger applications will. However they also come associated with a lot of costs.
Even if costs aren't awarded, if there's a public enquiry you get KC's involved. That's a significant cost to the council for their's.
However given that Kent's total budget is £2,600 million and the staff costs are £369 million, even if you halved your staff costs (excluding teachers) that would only cut the costs by 7%. Getting rid of all agency staff would save £31 million (1.2% of total spend).
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
