Connect with us

Published

on

On Thursday, the day after the end of the conference season, YouGov hosted a focus group with seven Blue Wall voters from around the South East exclusively for Sky News.

Some natural Conservatives, some former Tony Blair supporters, all with one thing in common: each voted Tory in the 2019 general election. Now their votes are up for grabs.

Here’s what our floating voter focus group found:

None said they were certain to vote Tory at the next election

Of the seven strong group, all of whom voted for Boris Johnson, none were prepared to say they would definitely vote Tory next time. Just one participant of the focus group confirmed they were more likely than not to back Liz Truss’s party next time around – suggesting plenty of doubts are harboured by the rest.

Several in the group were not wildly enthusiastic about the alternative – a Labour government – but felt it was now the default for the country given a profound concern at the existing team in power.

Stephanie, a solicitor, declared: “Do I think she (Truss) can do it? No. I don’t think she has the skills, the experience or the team behind her, and they’re all fighting against themselves.”

The group didn’t appear to think a month ago they would dislike Liz Truss – with Phyllis, an admirer of Margaret Thatcher, saying she started out believing the new PM would be better than Boris Johnson. But the decisions Truss has made in her first four weeks in power have left a profound impact on these voters.

Voters worry the Truss plans are dangerous

The focus group demonstrated just how closely voters had been paying attention to the succession of announcements by the new government, and have taken fright at the change of direction by Truss.

“In order for her plans to take place, it requires an enormous amount of borrowing and that’s putting up interest rates,” said Jane, a hospital inspector. “So, we’re potentially bankrupting the country. What Liz Truss is proposing is very reckless. I don’t think this is the time we should be experimental.”

Phyllis, a cashier, said that Truss was “going in too hard” with her plans without being in touch. Others worried what it would mean in practice.

David, who is retired, said that “you can’t just say growth, growth, growth. What’s the plan behind that?” Only one member of the group, Patrick, was positive and suggested he admired her bravery.

Voters do not warm to Truss’s personality

Just one of the seven members of our focus group at the end of the session voted to say they trust Liz Truss. Even that one backer, Patrick, volunteered that he felt she had less energy, was more like a “schoolteacher” and the “delivery wasn’t there” but liked the core Conservative messages she espouses.

The group did not see her as a unifying figure. Paul, a former local government officer, said she was “very abrasive” in her conference speech. He highlighted her childhood going on CND marches, saying she’s “taking it out” now on the Greenpeace protesters who interrupted the speech.

Jane, a mother of twins, suggested her attack on the “anti-growth coalition” was actually divisive. “I find her a very uncomfortable (watch),” while Jasmine who worked in the financial services industry suggested Truss is at her most passionate when she is attacking others.

Kier Starmer Interview with Beth Rigby

These southern swing voters are edging cautiously towards Labour

Three of the seven said they were likely to vote Labour at the next election. Two further members of the group had not made up their mind. For a party which has in recent times struggled to get disaffected Tory voters to consider Labour, this is a good result.

Keir Starmer was described as the “lesser of two evils” by one member of the focus group, most of whom felt the Labour leader currently has the political edge.

David, who worked as an auditor, said that it is now “inevitable” there will be a Labour government – a sense of inevitability is often politically advantageous for a political party. There was not unalloyed enthusiasm, however.

Keir Starmer remains damaged by the Corbyn years and fears of a lurch to the left

These southern Blue Wall voters were still worried by what they saw as the stain of the Corbyn years. Jane said she voted for Boris Johnson in 2019 because of Jeremy Corbyn and antisemitism.

Patrick, who works in the rail industry, highlighted how many of the shadow cabinet served under Jeremy Corbyn.

David said that while Keir Starmer knows he needs to have centrist policies to be electable, “I’m very worried that because of the makeup of the Labour Parliamentary Party, he’ll be under huge pressure to move to the left in government”.

There were concerns for many in the group that a Labour government could mean more strikes: just one, Paul, who worked in local government, said that inflation could mean in some cases they were justified.

Many in Westminster may see Starmer as having cut ties with much of the Corbyn era – the public are not so clear about the difference.

Voters aren’t yet convinced Keir Starmer is strong enough

The Labour leader was seen as honest, decent and a good salesman by most members of the group. But there remains a lingering concern over whether he is tough enough to take on his party if they demand he lurch to the left in power.

Some in the group queried his lack of policy specifics. David said the party is “just very polarised: you’ve got the extreme left and then you’ve got the middle and then Keir Starmer who will say anything.”

Jane said that his difficulty “is a divided party and he struggles to convey his personal convictions.”

Stephanie also felt Starmer is more centrist than a leftwinger “but Labour is funded by the unions so he may have to support them”. Voters were “between a rock and a hard place,” she added.

Outgoing Prime Minister Boris Johnson makes a speech outside 10 Downing Street, London, before leaving for Balmoral for an audience with Queen Elizabeth II to formally resign as Prime Minister. Picture date: Tuesday September 6, 2022.

Voters remain incandescent with Boris Johnson. There’s no hope of a comeback

Thatcher fan Stephanie said she was embarrassed and ashamed by the Conservative party.

David said that having voted Conservative, the more he saw of Boris Johnson the more he was impressed by his intellectual ability … but as time wore on “I just lost complete trust in him; he has no moral compass”.

There was still disgust at partygate, with Jane remaining incandescent at what happened in the Johnson era.

Voters want a general election more than another Tory leadership contest

Patrick, the most ardent Conservative supporter of the group, said that if the Conservatives do not rally round Liz Truss, “they’re committing political suicide”.

Jane, however, said that we were already past the point of no return: “I don’t think she’ll survive. I think she’ll gradually give up on things because she’ll watch her popularity ebb away, then she’ll not be able to manage her MPs and we will have a general election sooner rather than later.

Three of the group said that Tories should get rid of Liz Truss. Four of the seven wanted an early election.

Click to subscribe to Beth Rigby Interviews… wherever you get your podcasts

Core one nation Conservative values still looked popular

The danger for Labour and Starmer is that there is a lingering fear of the left, and a residual affection for core Tory values. Patrick said the Tories should go back to standing for law and order, high growth, low taxes, and supporting aspirations.

Self-styled centrist Jane said that as well as strong public services, she believed in a healthy economy to provide the tax revenues to support them.

Jasmine, who could now support Labour, said the “Tories have still got the interests of the country at heart in essence”.

The focus group participants are profoundly worried about the future

Every member of the group said they were “negative” about Britain’s future.

Stephanie said she had no faith in those in charge to solve the nation’s problems. Jane said she was feeling “quite highly anxious” for her children, adding that there was an “arrogant disconnect” between leaders and voters but what was different this time was the “borderline desperation” epitomised by the use of food banks.

Phyllis felt it was less bad in the 1980s than today because in the Thatcher era there was greater social mobility then.

David said that the difference between the 1970s and now is house prices. Jane concluded by saying she thought “we’re on the edge of some social unrest”, adding she “doesn’t want to see strikes and wants everyone to negotiate but some people are going to be so desperate.”

It is hard to remain in power if that sentiment is widely felt.

Continue Reading

World

Trump’s USAID cuts could lead to 14 million deaths, report warns

Published

on

By

Trump's USAID cuts could lead to 14 million deaths, report warns

Around 14 million people could die across the world over the next five years because of cuts to the US Agency for International Development (USAID), researchers have warned.

Children under five are expected to make up around a third (4.5 million) of the mortalities, according to a study published in The Lancet medical journal.

Estimates showed that “unless the abrupt funding cuts announced and implemented in the first half of 2025 are reversed, a staggering number of avoidable deaths could occur by 2030”.

“Beyond causing millions of avoidable deaths – particularly among the most vulnerable – these cuts risk reversing decades of progress in health and socioeconomic development in LMICs [low and middle-income countries],” the report said.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

March: ‘We are going to lose children’: Fears over USAID cuts in Kenya

USAID programmes have prevented the deaths of more than 91 million people, around a third of them among children, the study suggests.

The agency’s work has been linked to a 65% fall in deaths from HIV/AIDS, or 25.5 million people.

Eight million deaths from malaria, more than half the total, around 11 million from diarrheal diseases and nearly five million from tuberculosis (TB), have also been prevented.

USAID has been vital in improving global health, “especially in LMICs, particularly African nations,” according to the report.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Queer HIV activist on Trump and Musk’s USAID cuts

Established in 1961, the agency was tasked with providing humanitarian assistance and helping economic growth in developing countries, especially those deemed strategic to Washington.

But the Trump administration has made little secret of its antipathy towards the agency, which became an early victim of cuts carried out by the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) – formerly led by Elon Musk – in what the US government said was part of a broader plan to remove wasteful spending.

Read more:
USAID explained
USAID ‘a bowl of worms’ – Musk

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

What is USAID?

In March, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio said more than 80% of USAID schemes had been closed following a six-week review, leaving around 1,000 active.

The US is the world’s largest humanitarian aid donor, providing around $61bn (£44bn) in foreign assistance last year, according to government data, or at least 38% of the total, and USAID is the world’s leading donor for humanitarian and development aid, the report said.

Between 2017 and 2020, the agency responded to more than 240 natural disasters and crises worldwide – and in 2016 it sent food assistance to more than 53 million people across 47 countries.

The study assessed all-age and all-cause mortality rates in 133 countries and territories, including all those classified as low and middle-income, supported by USAID from 2001 to 2021.

Continue Reading

World

Thai PM Paetongtarn Shinawatra suspended amid outrage over leaked phone call

Published

on

By

Thai PM Paetongtarn Shinawatra suspended amid outrage over leaked phone call

Thailand’s prime minister has been suspended after a leaked phone call with a senior Cambodian politician caused outrage.

An ethics investigation into Paetongtarn Shinawatra is under way and she could end up being dismissed.

The country’s constitutional court took up a petition from 36 senators, who claimed dishonesty and a breach of ethical standards, and voted 7 to 2 to suspend her.

Protesters gathered in Bangkok at the weekend. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Protesters gathered in Bangkok at the weekend. Pic: Reuters

The prime minister’s call with Cambodia’s former leader, Hun Sen, sparked public protests after she tried to appease him and criticised a Thai army commander – a taboo move in a country where the military is extremely influential.

Ms Shinawatra was trying to defuse mounting tensions at the border – which in May resulted in the death of one Cambodian soldier.

Thousands of conservative, nationalist protesters held a demo in Bangkok on Saturday to urge her to step down.

Her party is clinging on to power after another group withdrew from their alliance a few weeks ago over the phone call. Calls for a no-confidence vote are likely.

More on Thailand

Deputy prime minister Suriya Juangroongruangkit will take over temporarily while the court looks into the case.

The 38-year-old prime minister – Thailand‘s youngest ever leader – has 15 days to respond to the probe. She has apologised and said her approach in the call was a negotiating tactic.

Read more from Sky News:
Netanyahu to meet Donald Trump next week
Cannes bringing in ‘drastic regulation’ on cruise ships

Follow the World
Follow the World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

The popularity of her government has slumped recently, with an opinion poll showing an approval rating of 9.2%, down from 30.9% in March.

Ms Shinawatra comes from a wealthy dynasty synonymous with Thai politics.

Her father Thaksin Shinawatra – a former Manchester City owner – and aunt Yingluck Shinawatra served as prime minister before her – in the early to mid 2000s – and their time in office also ended ignominiously amid corruption charges and military coups.

Continue Reading

World

Benjamin Netanyahu to meet Donald Trump next week amid calls for Gaza ceasefire

Published

on

By

Benjamin Netanyahu to meet Donald Trump next week amid calls for Gaza ceasefire

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will be meeting Donald Trump next Monday, according to US officials.

The visit on 7 July comes after Mr Trump suggested it was possible a ceasefire in Gaza could be reached within a week.

On Sunday, he wrote on social media: “MAKE THE DEAL IN GAZA. GET THE HOSTAGES BACK!!!”

At least 60 people killed across Gaza on Monday, in what turned out to be some of the heaviest attacks in weeks.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, left, with US President Donald Trump. Pic: Reuters
Image:
Benjamin Netanyahu, left, with Donald Trump during a previous meeting. Pic: Reuters

According to the Hamas-run health ministry, 56,500 people have been killed in the 20-month war.

The visit by Mr Netanyahu to Washington has not been formally announced and the officials who said it would be going ahead spoke on condition of anonymity.

An Israeli official in Washington also confirmed the meeting next Monday.

More on Benjamin Netanyahu

White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said the administration was in constant communication with the Israeli government.

She said Mr Trump viewed ending the war in Gaza and returning remaining hostages held by Hamas as a top priority.

Read more from Sky News:
Queen Elizabeth II’s favourite form of transport to be scrapped
How does sunscreen work?

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

The war in Gaza broke out in retaliation for Hamas’ 7 October 2023 attacks on southern Israel that killed 1,200 people and saw a further 250 taken hostage.

An eight-week ceasefire was reached in the final days of Joe Biden’s US presidency, but Israel resumed the war in March after trying to get Hamas to accept new terms on next steps.

Talks between Israel and Hamas have stalled over whether the war should end as part of any ceasefire.

Continue Reading

Trending