Public Opinion in Britain

You are politicians, policy-makers, and policy wonks, and public opinion is not your “bag.” Sure, you read the polls, but you treat them somewhat with disdain, unless perhaps you are running, or standing, for office and then they become a weapon in your armory, to be used in the campaign, and then put away until next time. My own position on the role of polls, surveys, and assessment of public opinion is one not of an advocate of any particular policy, subject, or topic, but as a provider of both objective and subjective information, obtained systematically and objectively, analyzed dispassionately, and delivered evenly. I do feel passionately that decisions about public policy (and corporate policy for that matter) should be made in the knowledge of the public’s view rather than in its absence.

Over the years the work we do has modernized and globalized. There is the World Values Survey, the Eurobarometer, and the Latinobarometer. And for four years now, the British Government’s Cabinet Office has used the “People’s Panel”—a world first—to inform British policy-makers in both business and government not just about people’s opinions and attitudes, but also their values, to help develop products and services provided to consumers. It has also linked government to citizens. It is government for the people and by the people, not for people to dictate to policy-makers, but to better inform them so they make better, more user-friendly policies.

Citizens and Society in a Context of Rapid Change
The pace of change in Britain is accelerating at an accelerating rate. To some people this is frightening all of the time and to most of us it’s frightening at least some of the time.

Longevity threatens economic stability; global money movement, and speed and independence of communications from government restrictions threaten economic sovereignty. The family structure is under threat, with the single person household projected to grow fastest. The service economy and the proportion of women in the workforce are growing. Downsizing is happening; part-time jobs are equally desired by both men and women. Europe and America’s share of world trade is approximately the same at about 18 percent each. Gigantic mergers are announced every day. Deregulation, technological change, and corporate restructuring are all are having their impact. Look at the public reaction to genetically modified organisms! The rise of civil society is accompanied by the rejection of role models and loss of confidence in institutions, while feminism and informality are finding greater acceptance. The loss of status and the breakdown of hierarchies present both threats and opportunities to our society.

Our work with a consortium of research companies across Europe has identified a number of “cross-cultural convergences.” Let me develop a few of these for you.

• The growing gap between institutions and people. There is a perceived lack of leadership, failure of top-down solutions, and institutional inertia. People are less hierarchical and formal in family life and daily interaction, less submissive to authority and the status quo, and less rigid in planning their lives. They are more interested in self-management and organization, willing to join grass-roots efforts to combat problems. They are intolerant towards inefficiencies and lack of voice, which is in tune with the desire for authenticity and integrity. In business and in government, ethics matter and have to be transparent. Thinking small and local is just as important as thinking big. Authoritative communication is less credible and less arrogance is wanted.

• The flow from ideology to the need for meaning. There is more emptiness in people’s lives. Old ideologies and belief systems are in decline. The search for greater meaning in everyday life motivates many activities. People want an anchor in their lives, but want their own value systems to be flexible. They want balance in their lives and focus on quality of life, not lifestyle.

• The trend from an organized social structure to a network culture. Ease of communication has resulted in massive increases in the levels and diversity of interpersonal contact, including an increase in word of mouth and more “human” networks. There are also opportunities for new services that put people in touch with products, information, and other people. But people also want to be able to “unplug” when they want privacy.

There is a growing sense that daily life has become too stressful and that security is undermined. In the application of Maslow’s “Heirarchy of Human Needs,” sustenance is assured, but security is threatened. Esteem is under attack, and self-actualization comes hard. Crude hedonism is on the rise, with more drugs and more anti-social behavior—and growing faster among young women than young men. Too many are what we call the “underwolves,” the underdog who bites back.

There should be no one in this room who is not aware that in the rich world today there are three people working to support one pensioner. By 2030 this ratio will fall to 1.5 to 1. It will take between 9 and 16 percent of the GDP in these countries to support today’s pension promises, never mind the increased cost of health care and housing that will be required. Now pensioners represent one in five of the adult population, and one in four will be a pensioner in two decades. The typical retired household occupant in twenty years will be a lone woman.

All of this will result in resentments building up: young against old, poor against rich, rural against urban, scientists against the people, producers against consumers, the people against the Institutions, central government against local government, globalized against the globalizers, and everybody against big business. Engineers want high tech; people want high touch. And most challenging of all, working-class groups feel excluded. They are anxious about new technologies and resistant to new ways of working.

Implications for Governance
There is receptivity in the British electorate to electronic government, but at the same time dissatisfaction with how they are being governed. By listening to, and learning from, people’s views, government is better able to provide the services that people want. The use of surveys by the British Government dates back to the Second World War and these days most government agencies use a variety of market research methods to inform their thinking. The People’s Panel we are doing for the Cabinet Office takes this one step further by providing a research tool that can provide consistency in approach over time in examining the public’s views of public services. It has been used recently to carry out research about the development of electronic government.

We found that there is strong support for being able to contact government through call centers. But nine out of ten people thought it was important for a person to answer rather than hear a recorded menu of options. There is significant support for local services becoming more directly responsive, for example, through referenda and the election of local mayors. People’s satisfaction with individual public services increases in proportion to how well a service keeps them informed about what it does. Openness is key to public satisfaction.

Attitudes towards new technology are mixed. On balance, people agree that it will make dealing with government easier, but confidentiality and other issues cause concern. There is also a mismatch between those more attuned to the potential for electronic government and those who make most use of public services.

Who Do the British Think They Are?
In a survey we carried out for The Economist in 1999, we tried to find out who the British thought they were, and who they saw as their allies. First, we updated a survey first carried out in 1969, when around four in ten of the British saw as their main partner the Commonwealth, and only about one in five each thought Europe or America. In 1999, 16 percent of the British said Europe would be Britain’s most reliable political ally, 15 percent the Commonwealth, and 59 percent America. Thirty-six percent of the British thought Britain could learn something from Germany in the way the economy works, 34 percent from America, and only 5 percent from the French. And when asked about the way democracy and government work, we found America well in front with 36 percent, Germany second with 23 percent, and France again in third place with only 6 percent. A cynical one in six said that none of them had anything to teach the British about governance, thank you very much.

We probed local and national identities and found 41 percent identified with their local community, 50 percent their region of the country, 45 percent the country (England/ Scotland/Wales)—but 72 percent in Scotland and 81 percent in Wales—and 40 percent Britain—but only 18 percent in Scotland. Only 16 percent picked Europe and even fewer, 9 percent, the Commonwealth. Over a third, 35 percent, said they least identified with Europe, and only 21 percent said they identified with the European Union’s twelve starred flag, nearly as many as the 23 percent who said they identified with the American Stars and Stripes!

No Euro Referendum before 2005 Election
Take it as read that the British electorate will return the Labour Government to office on May 3 with a majority most politicians only dream of. My current guess is a Labour majority of between 100 and 120 seats, far less than the current polls are showing, but still a healthy Labour majority that Wilson and Callaghan would have never dreamed, much less Foot or Kinnock.

I do not believe that in the life of the next Parliament, 2001—2005, Britain will find it politically expedient to join the Single European Currency. Last July I forecast that the Blair Government would call the promised referendum on British entry into the Single European Currency this November. I predicted that the referendum would succeed but just, based on the nearly half of the British who are generally in favor of British entry into the Single European Currency but could be persuaded either way. I now believe that the referendum cannot be won, and therefore will not be called in the life of the next Parliament.

The likeliest outcome of the election in 2005 is a narrow win for Labour, either independent of the Liberal Democrats, or in conjunction with them. Either way, Labour will need the Liberal Democrats for the following Parliament in coalition, the price of which will be referendums on both the Euro and proportional representation. By 2005, it will become apparent, even to the Conservative Party, that Britain cannot remain outside the Single European Currency and still have much say in the future of Europe. For the future of Europe will be—within my lifetime—by any other name, a United States of Europe.

* * *

All of us here today know that new technology brings benefits to people both through business and through government. Yet half or more of the public are not convinced. It isn’t easy to either prosper in business or govern in a technological age. Yet that is the Age we are in. We have to worry not only about adults who are skeptical or afraid of new technology, we have to worry about the children who are as well. They are not many, but they include the one in twenty who disagree that it is important for them to learn about how to use computers at school, the 8 percent who reject the idea that computers make learning more enjoyable, and the 15 percent who say they find computers too complicated to use. Technology brings people together across the world. It can be and should be a force for good in our society. Information is power, and technology is an enabler of people power in the hands of the people. And that’s got to be good—for Britain and Europe, and for the USA, and Canada, and for the world—if together we who do research can help our clients in the corporate sector, in the civic sector, and in the NGOs to understand, to anticipate, to proactively respond and go with the grain.