Connect with us

Business

What makes ‘Reform-curious’ Labour voters so hard to woo back

Published

on

Prime Minister Keir Starmer speaks as the Labour Party launch their local election campaign in Chesterfield


Unlock the Editor’s Digest for free

First we had the “red wall”, then the “blue wall” and now the “turquoise wall” — the one Nigel Farage promises to erect for his Reform UK party across traditional Labour areas. Electoral turbulence in Britain is marked by analysts repainting the political map. But these broad brush descriptions conceal complexity — and the challenge for Labour attempting to woo voters who are willing to switch allegiance. It also throws up intriguing policy dilemmas.

Local elections this Thursday could increase already high jitters. So many of the voters who backed Labour in July’s general election have cooled towards the party that vast energies are being spent pondering how to tempt them back — especially those targeted by Reform UK.

These “Reform-curious” voters might be hard to retain without repelling others, however. And it’s even more of a challenge than some of the cruder stereotypes suggest. A purely “Faragist” agenda is not to their taste — according to Steve Akehurst at research initiative Persuasion UK, who commissioned polls and focus groups to find out what makes them tick.

Concern about immigration is the main issue prioritised by both Farage’s core supporters and wavering or actively switching former Labour voters — particularly small boats and asylum hotels. But while this confirms Downing Street is right to be worried about Reform attacks on the agenda, Akehurst’s research reveals significant differences on other topics.

Labour waverers showed minimal interest in Reform’s attacks on the net zero target, for instance — even when asked about energy costs going up. While 63 per cent of those who voted Reform in 2024 were opposed to net zero, 60 per cent of Reform-curious Labour voters in the poll were in favour.

With a risk of even more support peeling off to the left of Labour’s winning 2024 coalition, Akehurst argues it’s a “free hit” to maintain momentum on the green energy agenda, keeping both sets of waverers on side. He flags up a finding that explodes a number of red wall stereotypes: three to four times as many Labour voters in these parts of the Midlands and northern England are in danger of being tempted by the centrist Lib Dems as those classed as Reform-curious, he says (the Greens are on the rise in other places).

The research picked up unease among these voters on other aspects of Reform. They like Farage but dislike his friendship with US President Donald Trump and his stance on Ukraine, and they wonder if his party is fully respectable. “In focus groups people are wrestling inside their own minds over whether Reform are OK or a bit extreme,” says Akehurst. Sixteen per cent worry about racist undertones.

Offering more hope to Labour MPs, there are also signs in Persuasion’s data (see chart) that anti-Farage tactical voting might buoy up support for their party: enough voters in red wall areas could decide to back the incumbent explicitly to keep Reform out — even Conservatives seem willing to do so.

With some arguing for a pitch to Reform-minded voters that has (somewhat comically) been dubbed “Hard Labour”, these insights contain a timely warning. The party’s left flank is seething with discontent but gets less attention at Westminster as MPs and apparatchiks obsess over Farage. Keeping these disgruntled voters happy while appealing to the Reform-curious is possible but it will require a careful policy mix. Both groups appear equally attracted to a traditional Labour pitch on supporting public services funded by taxation (this is not true of Reform’s core support — see chart).

Unfortunately for a government whose spending options are so constrained, there’s one more thing that Labour’s left flank and those tempted by Reform have in common: they are repelled by anything that resembles austerity. And that’s Labour’s real dilemma.

miranda.green@ft.com



Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Business

Trump could ask Supreme Court to halt tariff block as soon as Friday

Published

on

Trump shows no mercy with his tariffs, stocks sink


U.S. President Donald Trump speaks during an event announcing new tariffs in the Rose Garden at the White House in Washington, April 2, 2025.

Chip Somodevilla | Getty Images

The Trump administration said it may ask the U.S. Supreme Court as soon as Friday to immediately pause a federal court ruling blocking many of President Donald Trump‘s tariffs.

The U.S. will seek the “emergency relief” from the nation’s highest court “to avoid the irreparable national-security and economic harms at stake,” it said in a filing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Thursday morning.

But the government said it will only take that step if the federal appeals court does not quickly issue at least a temporary pause of the tariff ruling.

The comment came as Trump’s top aides are lashing out at the three judges on the U.S. Court of International Trade who struck down his “reciprocal” tariffs on Wednesday night, dealing a major blow to his trade agenda.

At the same time — and as it seeks relief from the higher courts — the Trump administration is asking that the trade-court judges pause any enforcement of their ruling while the case is being appealed.

“We are living under a judicial tyranny,” White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller wrote on Thursday in response to the ruling, escalating his initial claim that “the judicial coup is out of control.”

Top trade advisor Peter Navarro accused the court of being “globalist” and “pro-importer” on Bloomberg TV Thursday, and claimed it was biased against the administration’s tariff policies.

“We have these unelected judges who are trying to force their own will when it comes to tax policy, trade policy and all matters of the economy,” Trump advisor Jason Miller said during a Fox Business interview Thursday morning.

Those three judges — Jane Restani, Timothy Reif and Gary Katzmann — were appointed to the federal bench by two Republicans, Presidents Ronald Reagan and Trump, and one Democrat, Barack Obama, respectively.

Their ruling Wednesday invalidated dozens of country-specific tariffs that Trump imposed earlier this year under the purported authority of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

The judges found that the law does not “confer such unbounded authority” to presidents.

The nationwide, permanent block they imposed covers all of the retaliatory tariffs that Trump issued in early April as part of his sweeping “liberation day” plan to reshape international trade with the rest of the world.

The ruling also bars the administration from making any future modifications to the tariffs in question. The court gave the administration 10 days to make the necessary changes to carry out the orders.

The Trump administration filed a notice of appeal shortly after the judgment came down.

Read more CNBC politics coverage

Trump and the other defendants in the case have also asked the trade court to pause enforcement of its ruling while the appeal process plays out.

“It is critical, for the country’s national security and the President’s conduct of ongoing, delicate diplomatic efforts, that the Court stay its judgment,” Department of Justice attorney Sosun Bae wrote.

Bae pointed to declarations from Secretary of State Marco Rubio, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, who all warned that the ruling would “destroy” a preliminary trade agreement reached with China earlier this month, and throw future negotiations into doubt.

If the trade court’s ruling survives the upcoming appeals, it could strike a major blow to Trump’s economic agenda.

Tariffs and trade protectionism are a pillar of the president’s worldview. More recently, he has leaned heavily on the promise of tariffs to generate federal revenue as he seeks to cut taxes and increase military spending.

In the meantime, however, Trump has other means of imposing import taxes unilaterally.

Goldman Sachs economists pointed to three relatively obscure parts of U.S. trade law that could come into play soon: Sections 122 and 301 of the Trade Act of 1974, and Section 338 of the Trade Act of 1930.

Navarro projected optimism about the administration’s choices on Thursday.

“Any trade lawyer knows there’s just a number of different options we can take,” he said. “There is all sorts of things we can do well within the law.”

“So nothing has really changed here in that sense,” Navarro added.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

Global Markets, U.S. Futures Rise After Trump Tariffs Blocked by Court

Published

on

Global Markets, U.S. Futures Rise After Trump Tariffs Blocked by Court




Global stocks and U.S. stock-index futures rose early Thursday after the U.S. Court of International Trade on Wednesday struck down Trump’s global tariffs.



Source link

Continue Reading

Business

US jobless claims increase more than expected in May

Published

on

US jobless claims increase more than expected in May


The number of Americans filing new applications for unemployment benefits increased more than expected last week, while the jobless rate appeared to have picked up in May as labor market conditions continue to ease.

Initial claims for state unemployment benefits rose 14,000 to a seasonally adjusted 240,000 for the week ended May 24, the Labor Department said on Thursday. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast 230,000 claims for the latest week.

Worker hoarding by employers following difficulties finding labor during and after the COVID-19 pandemic is underpinning the jobs market. Nonetheless there has been an uptick in layoffs because of economic uncertainty as President Donald Trump pursues an aggressive trade policy, which economists say is making it challenging for businesses to plan ahead.

FED SAW INFLATION, JOBLESS, STABILITY RISKS AT MAY MEETING, MINUTES SHOW

Trump signs executive order

President Donald Trump speaks to the media after signing executive orders in the Oval Office at the White House on April 23, 2025 in Washington, D.C. (Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images / Getty Images)

A U.S. trade court on Wednesday blocked most of Trump’s tariffs from going into effect in a sweeping ruling that the president overstepped his authority. Economists said the ruling, while it offered some relief, had added another layer of uncertainty over the economy.

A report from the Bank of America Institute noted a sharp rise in higher-income households receiving unemployment benefits between February and April compared to the same period last year. Its analysis of Bank of America deposit accounts also showed notable rises among lower-income as well as middle-income households in April from the same period a year ago.

Economists expect claims in June to break above their 205,000-243,000 range for this year, mostly driven by difficulties adjusting the data for seasonal fluctuations, following a similar pattern in recent years. That would not suggest a material shift in labor market conditions.

POWELL WARNS ECONOMY COULD FACE MORE FREQUENT ‘SUPPLY SHOCKS’

People wait in job fair line

U.S. economists react to the BLS revising annual job growth by 818,000 jobs, on “Varney & Co.” and “Cavuto: Coast to Coast.” (Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images / Getty Images)

Minutes of the Federal Reserve’s May 6-7 policy meeting published on Wednesday showed while policymakers continued to view labor market conditions as broadly in balance, they “assessed that there was a risk that the labor market would weaken in coming months.”

They noted that there was “considerable uncertainty” over the job market’s outlook, adding “outcomes would depend importantly on the evolution of trade policy as well as other government policies.”

The U.S. central bank has kept its benchmark overnight interest rate in the 4.25%-4.50% range since December as officials struggle to estimate the impact of Trump’s tariffs, which have raised the prospect of higher inflation and slower economic growth this year.

Jerome Powell

Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell responds to a question during an on-stage discussion at a meeting of The Economic Club of Washington, at the Renaissance Hotel in Washington, D.C.. (REUTERS/Amanda Andrade-Rhoades/File Photo / Reuters Photos)

The number of people receiving benefits after an initial week of aid, a proxy for hiring, increased 26,000 to a seasonally adjusted 1.919 million during the week ending May 17, the claims report showed. The elevated so-called continuing claims reflect companies’ hesitance to increase headcount because of the economic uncertainty.

GET FOX BUSINESS ON THE GO BY CLICKING HERE

Continuing claims covered the period during which the government surveyed households for May’s unemployment rate. The jobless rate was at 4.2% in April.

Many people who have lost their jobs are experiencing long spells of unemployment. The median duration of unemployment jumped to 10.4 weeks in April from 9.8 weeks in March.



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2017 Zox News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by WordPress.