Subscribe Here | Send your thoughts

Dear friend,

Hope this finds you well!

In this week’s newsletter:

• The view from the focus groups: Insights from our first group in Holborn and St Pancras - what do voters feel about Keir Starmer’s resignation and Zack Polanski, and what do they want from their next MP?

• The politics of nature: Our latest report, Strong Roots, is a deep dive into each voter group’s attitudes on nature and wildlife.

• Introducing our new training programmes: Our new programmes turn our insights and modelling into actionable advice for companies, leaders and national institutions trying to navigate public opinion.
• Work with More in Common: We’re hiring! If you’re interested in joining the team as a Senior Research Associate, find more details here.

For a deep dive into the upcoming Holborn and St Pancras by-election, and a look at the AfD’s victory in the Saxony-Anhalt state election, listen to this week’s podcast episode:

The view from the focus groups: Holborn and St Pancras

Both the Labour and Green candidates have now been selected in the race to replace Keir Starmer. Last week in Holborn and St Pancras we spoke to voters to hear how they feel about his time in office, their early impressions of Andy Burnham, and what they make of the Green Party.

This was a group who had mostly voted Labour at the 2024 General Election, but many would now be open to voting Green. Asked about their former MP, their feelings were mixed: some were actively angry and disappointed, while others felt Starmer was a ‘nice guy’ but a bad communicator, and that he should have stayed on.

"He's the worst communicator on earth. He should have had somebody telling him what to say and when to say it, and I think that was his downfall. He's made mistakes on some of the big issues [...] but I don't think he should have gone. Everybody's going to make mistakes, and if we kick people out the minute they slip up, we're idiots. He messed up over Mandelson — he should have just fessed up and said, 'I did it because I thought it would be good for the country, how stupid am I' — but they're all going to make mistakes."

Emma, retired

"I had high hopes at some point. He's clearly intelligent, a lawyer, good on human rights. I just think communication was never his strong suit. He kept saying he wasn't going to leave us in the lurch, so it wasn't necessarily what he wanted for himself, but it felt like stability. In the end I think he did listen to public opinion, which surprised me."
Natalie, music licensing

"He's a big part of the reason a lot of older Labour supporters are going Green now, abandoning any hope on welfare. I think he's just a face, to be honest. I didn't think he'd be around for long in the first place - the past five PMs have been in such quick succession, it's like hot potato."

Tommy, plumber

So far, the jury was out on Andy Burnham. All agreed that he was a better communicator than Starmer, and some felt that he was offering a refreshing return to Labour values. But some wondered whether there was any difference in substance or just ‘more energy’ than Starmer. In particular, while the government’s cost of living interventions were popular, some felt that the scale was too small to make a meaningful difference. Some members of the group wanted something more radical.

"Cut from the same cloth. He's got similar backers, similar funders. Is it really going to be any different, apart from the northern thing and championing Manchester? It's about communication, that's all."

Emma, retired

"Maybe he's trying to be a bit more like Corbyn — a bit more to the left because of his northern image. That's what he's trying to appeal to, the working class."

Tommy, plumber

"We've heard this kind of thing for years — they tell you it'll save the average family forty-five pounds a year. That barely gets you a round of drinks these days. It's nothing. We want the government to go after the huge corporations that don't pay their taxes here, like Amazon, but they're afraid to, because they think if they go against the rich, they might need a job from them one day."
Calum, semi-retired documentary film editor

Several people around the table had already voted Green in the local elections, often drawn by their climate policies and disillusionment with Labour. We’ve written before about how the newer ‘Polanski Wave’ of voters are still concerned about climate and nature, even if it’s economic or social issues that have swung their vote.

That was clearly evident in this focus group: many said that the Greens’ climate policies were a key appeal, but some worried the Greens had lost their focus on the issue, instead being too preoccupied with cultural issues.

"For me, the biggest topic I'm interested in is climate change — if we don't take care of what's happening right now, there isn't going to be a place called home. I'd rather put my energy into things that make concrete changes to buildings and communities. If the Greens put their money where their mouth is on energy, I'd rather give them a go than Labour."
Angela, charity worker

"You're not talking about the climate. I don't know what your policy is — I know your policy is about the trans issue, but I don't know what your policy is."
Emma, retired

There's no doubt that Polanski has a strong personal appeal, but in this group there were some real doubts about his judgement and character. His retweet criticising police conduct after the Golders Green stabbing - in which two Jewish people and a Muslim member of the public were attacked - struck several as a real misstep, one they suspected was driven by his own blind spot around antisemitism. One person felt he would be better off simply staying off social media altogether. And his past career as a hypnotherapist came up as a question mark over his authenticity.

"I think it was really ill-judged, and he shouldn't have done it. He's obviously pro-Palestine, and I think that shaped his response — a lot of people are, but you can't let that colour how you react to something like this. He should probably just get off social media; he's wasted a lot of time on it."
Emma, retired

"I value authenticity and transparency in my politicians, so I was a bit put off by it. But looking into it, I feel like the papers just ran with it because it made such a good story."
Natalie, music licensing

In a contest that will be a straight fight between Labour and the Greens, it was striking to hear the depth of disillusionment these progressive voters felt about the left of British politics. Asked what a Reform government would mean, people were viscerally afraid, with one participant calling it “catastrophic”. But many felt that the left weren’t stepping up to offer a better alternative, or to take seriously the reasons that were turning people toward Reform. There was a real sense of dejection among some of these voters, and it’s clear that neither Labour nor the Greens have convinced them they have the answers to the big issues facing the country.

"Do I place any blame on the left for (Reform)? Yeah, I do actually. I think they could have done a lot more. There was an opportunity there, and there still is, but we need more transparency than they've given us."
Angela, charity worker

"Take the grooming gangs — that's a big Farage issue too, but you very rarely heard Starmer or anyone else [...] The left calling those people bigots isn't helpful, because they've got a valid issue they wanted to be discussed. The elites in North London saying 'you bigot' — that's how we come across."
Emma, retired

"The only hope I ever had was Jeremy Corbyn. That period when I saw so many young people sign up to politics, it was so exciting — whether he could or couldn't have done the job, everything that came out of his words felt authentic. He's a very good local MP, so many people highly regard him for what he does in his own borough. I'd like someone who was the equal of that (...) We're a democratic society and people have got really apathetic about voting, and I refuse not to vote because it's my right. But there were times I almost couldn't be bothered this time, and I hated myself for it."
Angela, charity worker

The electoral politics of nature

This week, we’ve released a new report on the politics of nature - commissioned by five of the UK’s leading nature and conservation charities - that explores each party’s voters’ expectations and priorities on nature.

Four in five (82 per cent) Britons say protecting nature and wildlife is of personal importance to them with nearly half (46 per cent) saying it is “very important”. This level of importance is true across voters of all parties from right to left.

The major parties face different challenges when it comes to navigating the politics of nature - so, where does each party stand?

Is Reform missing an opportunity on nature?

Nature unifies Reform’s base, but they are less confident in Nigel Farage’s commitment to protecting nature and wildlife. While issues such as welfare cuts threaten to divide Reform’s coalition of voters, support for protecting nature carries, overwhelmingly, across both Reform’s older more hardcore supporters and newer more moderate voters.

However, perceptions of the party’s current stance on nature do not necessarily align with this. Nigel Farage arguably has the most loyal support base of all party leaders, with his internal approval ratings consistently the highest. Yet when it comes to nature, Reform voters are less confident: Farage is the leader least likely to be seen by their own voters to care about, or be capable of protecting, nature. Although, they are still more likely than not to think he cares.

Labour voters trust the party on nature but going too far in the “Build, baby, Build” approach could undermine this

For now, Labour voters trust Burnham to meet their care for nature. Not only do Labour voters care deeply for nature, but they are the only voter group that is clearly optimistic that politicians also care - 50 per cent think protecting nature is important to politicians compared to just 35 per cent of Liberal Democrats, the next highest group. Further, Burnham is the leader most likely to be seen as capable of protecting nature both nationally and by his own voters.

However, when we tested the Starmer Government’s “Build, baby, Build” rhetoric and policies, we found they could clash with their voters' desire to both protect nature and build enough houses.

The Green Party’s voter base may have shifted but nature remains fundamental to the Greens’ appeal

When asked about what issues the Green Party stands for at its best, Britons, Green voters and those considering voting Green all clearly believe that protecting nature is a top issue - 52 per cent of current Green voters selected it compared to just 19 per cent for tackling inequality, 20 per cent for tackling poverty and 27 per cent for standing up for what is right in the Israel-Palestine conflict. Green considerers are even more likely to see nature as the defining issue of the party with 63 per cent citing it, over 12 per cent for tackling inequality.

Zack Polanski also has political capital on nature, but this is not necessarily assured. 31 per cent of Britons believe he cares about protecting nature, narrowly ahead of Burnham on 29 per cent but clear of all other party leaders.

However, the public is less sure when it comes to delivery: Britons are marginally less likely to think he is capable of protecting nature (28 per cent) than they think he cares about it (31 per cent). For all other party leaders this gap is the inverse.

Are the Conservatives still the traditional countryside champions?

The Conservative Party has long been seen as the traditional champion of nature and the countryside. But is this still the case? Just five per cent of Britons now think that protecting nature and wildlife is a key issue for the Conservatives, well below the Greens on 33 per cent and just trailing the Liberal Democrats on eight per cent.

2024 was, of course, a bad election nationally for the Conservatives and their losses carried over into areas of natural beauty. In 2019 they virtually dominated across these seats, taking 96 of the 109 seats covered at least ten per cent by National Landscapes in England and Wales, and National Scenic Areas in Scotland. In 2024, this dropped to just 33 seats.

The Liberal Democrats are local champions on nature, but do they have a national brand?

In focus groups in Liberal Democrat constituencies, the party and MPs are often praised for their local actions to protect the natural environment. The party also does relatively well in being seen to care about nature, second only to the Greens. They also overperform among voters who cite climate change and the environment as a top issue, going from 11 per cent of the vote nationally to 18 per cent. Further, in 2024 nearly half of their seats were won in areas covered at least ten per cent by National Landscapes.

And yet protecting nature and wildlife is not seen as a defining issue for the party - just eight per cent of Britons and 14 per cent of Liberal Democrat voters think the party stands for this. Seven other policy areas such as investing in the NHS or growing the economy beat nature.

Read the report, 'Strong Roots', here: 

Introducing More in Common’s new training programmes

One of the most common questions we get asked is - ‘What do I do with public opinion insights when I have them?’. Which is why I’m delighted that More in Common UK has now launched its brand new set of training programmes. The three programmes turn our insights and modelling into actionable advice for companies, leaders and national institutions on navigating public opinion:

• Building Broader Campaigns: for campaigners who want to use public opinion research to reach beyond existing supporters and build campaigns that resonate with the wider public.
• Managing Progressive Workforces: for senior leaders, boards and HR teams who want to understand how to lead values-driven teams effectively while keeping the organisation focused on its mission.
• Navigating Public Opinion for Leaders: For managers and leaders in institutions, companies and large organisations who want to know how to read public opinion accurately and lead through contested issues with confidence.

Here's a closer look at each of the three programmes:

Using our British Seven Segments, we know that those working on issues such as climate, migration or social justice stand out in many ways when compared to the general public. This is especially true in the charity sector, where Progressive Activists are overrepresented among employees. As a result, progressive campaigns can be very good at mobilising existing supporters, but sometimes struggle to reach groups who may have different starting points and values from their own.

Thus, our Building Broader Campaigns programme is designed to help progressive campaigners overcome this challenge and utilise public opinion insights to speak to groups beyond their core audiences.

Similarly, Progressive Activists have unique perspectives and expectations in the workplace. For example, Progressive Activists are almost twice as likely to say it’s acceptable to resign in protest in your workplace, and three quarters say that it’s appropriate to organise a staff protest if you disagree with management decisions.

Progressive Activists are the backbone of much of the civil society sector. While they will work hard to advance causes they care about, their distinct expectations of the workplace can also create leadership challenges. For example, creating a culture where more vocal voices dominate internal debate, making it harder to voice disagreement.

Our Managing Progressive Workforces training helps senior leaders, HR teams and board members understand the dynamics of progressive workforces and offers tools to help them get the best out of their workforces, while keeping the focus on their organisation’s mission.

Finally, much of our work at More in Common is about helping organisations better understand the public opinion context they work in. The Navigating Public Opinion for Leaders programme gives guidance to leaders across institutions, companies and large organisations on how to read public opinion accurately and use these insights to lead through core and contested issues with confidence.

If you would like to know more about our training programmes, please visit our webpage on the link below or contact our team on training@moreincommon.com.

Remember, you can find our analysis on Holborn and St Pancras, and more in this week’s podcast episode:

Work with More in Common

At More in Common, we’re looking for a Senior Research Associate to deliver high-quality research projects. They will work across our core areas of research for clients, media and communications, political polling and partnerships. We’re a small team with a start-up culture where everyone is expected to execute a range of responsibilities. The role will be based in our London office Monday-Thursday with Friday at the office or working at home.

Apply or find our more here:

All the best, 

Luke