From Security Comes Hope
Politics in the age of insecurity
We live in an age of insecurity. War has returned to the European continent. Political upheaval has disrupted some of the most stable democracies in the world. A rising China is destabilising the old, America-centric global order.
In this new era, Britain has been uniquely exposed. Cutting hard and fast after the financial crisis, our economy has been starved of investment. Growth has flatlined. Our public services are crumbling. Our councils are going bankrupt.
In this paper, we show that insecurity defines the lives of millions of Britons across the country.
This insecurity is largely financial. Asked for the main causes of their insecurity, 62% of voters cited rising energy costs, 61% rising food costs, 36% flat wages, and 32% rising housing costs.
There is also considerable community insecurity. Asked what would make their lives feel more secure, 38% called for more police on the streets and 34% for better physical and mental health services. Local healthcare was a major feature of people’s insecurity, with 52% saying the best way to improve their security would be better physical health.
A sense of national insecurity is clearly evident too. 44% cite global conflict as a leading cause of their insecurity, 33% climate change, and 25% rising numbers of migrants.
Insecurity splits down party lines: Labour’s most loyal voters are more likely to feel insecure about climate change (57%) and global conflict (52%). The Conservatives’ most loyal voters are more likely to cite rising numbers of migrants (54%).
Meeting these challenges calls for a new politics of security. Its aim is first to restore certainty and stability to people’s lives. Those who have lived a life of poverty or precarity understand that security is a value in its own right. Those with the luxury of taking it for granted are quick to dismiss it as unambitious, even defensive. When asked why they value security in their lives, 40% of voters say they feel they have a “right to a life without fear and worry” - twice as high as any other reason.
Security is intrinsically important, but it is more than that too. Security is also important because it makes other things in life possible. A secure life is one where we have the ability to look to the future. No longer held back by the catastrophic cost of failure, we have the freedom to pursue our ambitions, to take calculated risks, to find hope. Our research shows that voters value security for a number of reasons: 20% think “life should be fun”, 17% want to “pass on a better world”, 17% want to live in a “caring society”, 15% want to be “treated fairly”. Without security, none of these varied hopes and ambitions is achievable.
Because security is the foundation for a wide range of hopes and dreams, a politics built around security unites a wide coalition of voters, who share experiences of insecurity but whose aspirations are varied. The pluralism of security as a value is what underpins its political strength. By giving people the chance to pursue their own ambitions again, security is a political idea that binds us together.
Insecurity is broad, and that breadth is both its strength and its weakness as a political idea. With insecurity so rife, it is hard to know where to start. Based on the public opinion research that underpins this report, we suggest five conditions of a secure life that could guide a future Labour administration:
1. A secure job and a decent wage
2. Bills that are predictable and under control
3. decent home you can grow old in
4. Everyday services that you can depend on
5. Safe streets and strong communities
In Britain’s age of insecurity, each of the above seem distant. Within the fiscal constraints that a future Labour government might inherit, achieving them feels harder still. A politics built around security will require prioritisation and trade-off, prioritising long-term cures over short-term fixes. It will require that we govern differently, no longer relying on the approaches we took in past, more prosperous times. Perhaps most importantly, building security will take time. This will not be the work of a single-term. Nor should it be presented to a rightly sceptical public as such.
The hunger for greater security is real though. And Labour enjoys a wide lead over the Conservatives. Of the 25 issues that contribute most to people’s sense of insecurity, Labour is more trusted than the Conservatives to tackle all but two. When asked who they trust to make their lives more secure in general, voters back Labour by a margin of 13 points, and back Starmer over Sunak by 9 points.
This lead, however, is fragile. Asked to pick between the two parties 45% of voters cannot do so. Amongst one group of voters, Labour’s lead is particularly delicately poised. In April 2023, Labour Together identified ‘Stevenage Woman’ as the voter who holds the next election in her hands. A financially insecure, young mother, she represents the largest group of voters in key Labour-Conservative marginals. Asked about who she trusts to make her more secure, Labour leads by 11 points and Starmer leads by 5 points. One of the most volatile voters in the electorate, Stevenage Woman votes on who will best address her concerns, not according to long-term party loyalty. Under the Conservatives, her life has grown increasingly insecure. Labour must prove that they can reverse that.
In the months to come, Britain will head towards its next election. Insecurity will still define life in Britain then and the promise of security will still bind voters together. While Labour may lead on this defining issue today, the race is not yet run. This paper points to how a new politics of security could help Labour gain power, and - ultimately - bring hope where today there is fear.
