Voters will reject tax rises, Labour think tank warns Ed Miliband

Fabian Society tells Miliband public won't support his spending plans to beat austerity

Andrew Grice
Wednesday 18 July 2012 11:46
Comments

A Labour group has warned Ed Miliband that the public do not support the party's spending priorities and will not vote for higher taxes to pay for them.

Click HERE to view graphic

The Labour-affiliated Fabian Society has sounded the alarm that the party risks being out of step with public opinion on the crucial issue of tax and spending at the 2015 general election. It suggests that voters have become more "small c-conservative" in the age of austerity.

Its warning, based on extensive opinion research, is a reminder to the Labour leadership that its eight to 10-point lead in the polls could melt away in the heat of an election campaign.

The Fabians found that fewer than one in five people accepts the need for higher taxes to fund more public spending in four core areas seen as a priority for Labour – job schemes; nurseries and childcare; higher education and public housing. Twice as many people want cuts as support increases in subsidised housing.

Andrew Harrop, the society's general secretary, said: "In a hugely challenging fiscal environment, Ed Miliband has to do far more to convince the public of the need for increased provision of public services in the areas Labour values.

"The British public are overwhelmingly small-c conservative when it comes to public spending – in six of the eight policy areas we polled, the most popular response was that current levels of tax and spend were 'about right'. Clearly, there is little appetite for a major change in government spending priorities. If Labour wins in 2015, it will have to face difficult decisions on public spending."

However, one ray of hope for Labour is that the public do not understand how much is spent in key policy areas. The YouGov survey of 2,000 people, to be published in Fabian Review, found that people vastly over-estimate the amount spent on welfare, unemployment benefit, child benefit, housing benefit and tax credits. "Correcting the record on the real level of spending in 'unpopular' areas might allow Labour to break out of the race to the bottom on public spending," said Mr Harrop.

The findings will put pressure on Labour to propose "switch spending" from one area to another rather than raise overall budget limits it would inherit from the Coalition if it wins power. These will include at least two more years of cuts after 2015. Mr Miliband has warned his party there can be no return to the high public spending of the Blair-Brown era, but the party is keeping its policies under wraps.

The poll found that people support higher spending in two areas – the NHS and care for the elderly. Labour supporters are a lot more positive about higher budgets than Tory and Liberal Democrat voters.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in